l^lMl 
 
 fe.*^** ■ *.- 
 
 
 \ 
 
 \ 

 
 6. 
 
 CORRESPONDENCE 
 
 WITH THE 
 
 ARCHBISHOP OF CANTERBURY 
 
 WITH RESPECT TO THE 
 
 NEGLECT AND SPIEITUAL DESTITUTION 
 
 OP THE 
 
 PAEISH OF TONBRIDGE. 
 
 SPOTTISWOODE & CO., NEAV-STREET SQUARE, LONDOX. 
 
 1875.
 
 
 '^>i''i:^ 
 
 'ij^^^«
 
 Dry Hill, Toubridge, 
 
 iJecember 27th, 1875. 
 
 Sir,— In a letter which you wrote to me by desire, 
 as you tell me, of the Archbishop of Canterbury, dated 
 Nov, 11, 1875, I find this passage : " Ynu are 
 aware, as you have yourself stated, that his Grace has 
 longsince received full reports from the churchwardens." 
 
 I shall feel obliged to you if you will be so good as to 
 inform me of your authority for the assertiim that I 
 have made this statement. — I am, sir, your obedient 
 servant, HF.RnKRT N. Ev.vxs. 
 
 To John B. Lee, Esq, 
 
 Addingtou Park, Croydon, 
 
 December 30th, 1875. 
 
 Dear Sir,— Mr, J. B. Lee has placed in my hamls 
 a letter addressed by you to him on December 27th, 
 1875. 
 
 Mr, Lee requests me to answer this letter, as the 
 document to which it refers is not in his keeping at 
 Broad Sanctuary, but is preserved amongst the Arch- 
 bishop's papers here. 
 
 On reference to your letter to the Archbishop, dated 
 November 8, 1875, I find the following worrls : "On 
 the 12th of June last when your Grace honoured " (me) 
 "with an audience at Tonbridge, they (viz., the 
 churchwardens) wei'e both ushered into your presence 
 as 1 left it." 
 
 T presume it is to this interview, of which you have 
 made mention in addressing his Grace, and to what 
 then passed between his Grace and the churchwardens, 
 that special allusion is made in tlie letter addressed to 
 you on November 11th, respecti'ig the accuracy (^f 
 which you now make enquiries. -Believe me to \k\ 
 dear sir, yours faithfully, 
 
 Craufurd Tait, 
 
 Dr, Herbert Evans. Chaplain. 
 
 29th December, 1875. 
 Sir,— The Archbishop of Canterbury desires me to 
 send for your consideration, the copy of a letter which 
 he has received from Mr. Fleming. -I am, yours truly, 
 
 Craufurd Tait. 
 Dr. Evans. 
 
 f corv. ] 
 Stafford House, Tonbridife. 
 
 December 21st, 1875. 
 May rr plk.vse your Grace,— On my return home, after a 
 brief absence, I had the i)leasure of finding your Grace's kind 
 letter of December 14. informinir the memorialists who ad-
 
 dresseJ 3our Grace on November 30, of the very satisfactory 
 arrangements which have been made. 
 
 I hare to acknowledge your Grace's two commanications 
 with the grateful thanks of the memorialists for the great paina 
 and trouble jour Grace lias taken in relieving the parish from 
 its most pressing penilexity.— I have the honour to be, your 
 Grace's obedient servant, 
 
 I. Plant Fleming. 
 His Grice the Lord Arohbishop of Canterbury. 
 
 Dry Hill, 
 
 'r()nl)rid<?e. 
 January loth, 187G. 
 May it please your Grace,— I beg leave to ac- 
 ! kuDwlfflge the receipt of yoivr Grace's two letters of 
 December 29th and 30th, 1875, and also a coiw of a 
 i letter to your Gra'-e from Mr. I. Plant Fleming of the 
 : 21st of December last. 
 
 These letters ijurport to be a reply to oiie addressed 
 I by me to your Grace's secretary on the '27th of Decem- 
 ber, but I am quite at a loss to discover in them any 
 finswer to the question which I then put to him, 
 ; namely : what was his auth(jrity for asserting that I 
 hail "stated that vour Grace had long since received 
 full reports from the churchwardens." 
 
 I cannot think that your Grace considers that my 
 statement, that the churchwardens were both ushered 
 into your Grace's presence as I left it, is tantamount 
 to thn above a.sserti"!). 
 
 I'he teiiour of all my letters to your Grace and es- 
 pecially * f that of August 19th, shows clearly that 
 every step which I have taktp rested on the belief 
 that full reports had never been made to vour Grace 
 by the clu'rch wardens ; and tliis belief became cer- 
 tainty when I received your Grace's letter, of Sep- 
 tember 20th, calling on me to substantiate or withdraw 
 certain statements copied by your Grace from my 
 letter of August 19th. It seemed impossible to su].'- 
 pose your Grace could call on m--. on the 20th Septem- 
 ber to substantiate (by an exy^ensive lawsuit) state- 
 ments, of the truth or falsehood of which your Grace 
 had already been certified by the appointed officials on 
 the previous 12th of June. 
 
 With respect to the letcer of Mr. Fleming as I have 
 1)0 knowledge of the .subject of the memorial, or of 
 the signatures attached to it, except from hearsay, 
 while thanking your Grace for taking the trouble to 
 send it to me. I can make no use of it, in the way 
 suggested by your Grace. — I am, j'our Grace's most 
 obedient atid humble servant 
 
 Herbert N. Evans. 
 To the most Reverend the Lord Archbishop 
 of r'nnterburv.
 
 ■#
 
 TONBEIDGE PARISH CHUECH 
 
 To the CJiurrJi ward ens of the Parish of St. Peter and St. Paul, 
 Touhridge. 
 
 Dry Hill, Tonbridge : 
 
 June 8, 1875. 
 
 Gentlemen, — Ou Wednesday, May 26tli, I made an application to 
 you, for the second time, to urge upon you the performance of your 
 duty as Churchwardens, by reporting to the Ordinary the neglected 
 state of this parish in spiritual matters, and informed you of a deter- 
 mination to call immediately a public meeting of the parishioners to 
 consider it and, if possible, to procure its amendment. Two or thfee 
 hours afterwards you both called ou me to press sti*ongly your objec- 
 tions to such a proceeding, and promised me that if I would forbeal* 
 you would take upon yourselves this burden, and let me know the 
 following Monday, at latest, what you meant to do. At that visit I 
 pointed out to you^ that it is by law *the duty of the Churchwardens 
 twice a year to present to the Ordinary whatever is wrong or irregular 
 in the Parson or parishioners ; and that they may be compelled to do 
 so by the Bishop. As to the Parson, if he is irregular in the per- 
 formance of Divine Service, or alters it, or omits part of it, or adds 
 things not authorised by the Rubric ; also if he neglects to visit the 
 sick or administer the Sacraments.' Depending on these promises, I 
 took no further step; A fortnight has now elapsed, and I have re- 
 ceived no communication of any kind from you. 
 
 I must remind you of the occasion of this my repeated appeal to you. 
 On that morning a congregation of 25 or 30 people, including two 
 women to be Churched, assembled at the Church at the usual time of 
 Morning Prayer. There was no Clergyman to take the ServicCj but 
 when the people were preparing to leave the Church, a neighbouring 
 Clergyman was found, who, at 18 minutes past 11 o'clock, began the 
 prayers. I must also remind you that this is not the first time that no 
 provision for the Service had been made. Not long ago the congrega- 
 tion at the morning weekly Service waited for some time, but, as the 
 Service was not begun, half of them returned home. 
 
 It will not, I presume, be denied that these things are ' wrong and 
 irregular,' but they are trifling in comparison with many others 
 which I must recall to your notice. In a parish of 4,000 or 5,000 
 
 A
 
 people, with a valuable living, it might be expected that the Incumbent 
 would take care that the Services were regularly conducted, and the 
 pastoral duties faithfully fulfilled ; and if his health were unequal to 
 this, that he would provide at least one efficient Curate to help him. 
 For years past the Vicar has been rarely seen, either in the Church or 
 out of it ; for weeks together the Services are taken by any Clergyman 
 who can be found, sometimes without giving him any previous notice ; 
 we never know who it will be until we see him. This is no random 
 statement. From the beginning of February of this year up to April 
 the 18th, when he read prayers twice, the Vicar was not seen in Church : 
 the usual Wednesday evening Service was discontinued for some weeks, 
 although on April 7th he was at Canterbury. Again, from April 18th 
 to May 30th he was absent from his Church altogether, though at 
 times travelling to London. 
 
 So much for the Services. Then with regard to pastoral care : as 
 concerns the Incumbent, we may be said to have, on his part, none. 
 In round terms, he never visits anyone, well or sick; some of the 
 parishioners, especially the poor, do not know him by sight. In 
 severe illness, if they are urged to send for him, they say it is of no 
 use ; for when they have sent he never came, but sent the Scripture 
 Reader, a layman, in his stead. When they or their children are 
 seriously ill, or dying, and longing for the consolations and ministra- 
 tions of religion, they are obliged to ask a seceder from the Church to 
 come and pray with them, and administer the Holy Communion ; not 
 that they prefer this, but those whose duty it is to attend them neglect 
 it. Let me, however, observe that I have no intention to throw 
 blame on the Scripture Reader, whose untiring industry and zeal in 
 doing all the good in his power are most praiseworthy, but he is not a 
 parish Priest. 
 
 We have had no Curate since November 1873, when the licence of 
 the last Curate expired, and he seceded from the Church, carrying with 
 him about 700 of the congregation, of whom probably nearly all would 
 have remained in the communion of the Church if they had been cared for 
 as they have a right to expect. Who can be surprised that so many 
 should have left it, when they see their ordained Pastor so regardless of 
 their spiritual welfare ? 
 
 One serious result of this neglect of the poor is that many of their 
 children are left unhaptised for years : for example, two children were 
 found unbaptised, of whom the youngest was a year old, and three in 
 one family, the eldest being four years old. Meantime, if they are in 
 peril of death, there is no one ready to Baptise them, unless they can 
 find a chance Clergyman, or ask a dissenting minister. One child died 
 about two months ago, another was expected to die of whooping- 
 cough in April last, both of whom were Baptised by a dissenter. 
 These cases occurred in a small district of the parish occupied by poor 
 people, which contains 36 families, with IIG children — 176 souls in all.
 
 Of these, six are habitual invalids, some dying of lingering diseases, 
 cancer, pulmonary consumption, disease of heart ; five had illness last- 
 ing: for three months, and sometimes much more. As far as can be ascer- 
 tained by strict enquiry, one only of these had been seen by Vicar or 
 Curate since December 1872. In this one case the Vicar made three or 
 four visits, at the request of a friend, in 1874, and promised to come 
 again, but has never done so. There is good reason for thinking that 
 the other parts of the parish are not any better cared for than this. 
 
 Our National and Infant Schools are said to be in good order, and 
 the master is an excellent one ; but their good state is not in conse- 
 qnence of any supervision of the Incumbent. In the year ending May 
 1st, 1875, the School log-book shows two visits from him to the Boys' 
 School — one to hear the boys sing, and one to speak to the master ; 
 two each to the Girls' and Infants' Schools, but never to examine or 
 catechise them. From my experience, I thought it was customary for 
 the Incumbent or his Curate to open the Schools daily with prayer, and 
 then to Catechise the children. On October 4th, 1873, at a meeting of 
 the School Committee, some remarks were made on the rare visits of 
 the Vicar to the Schools : he replied that it was not a part of his busi- 
 ness to visit them. 
 
 Much might be said on the lawless manner, both in omission 
 and addition, in which the Services of the Church are conducted, more 
 especially the administration of the Holy Communion; but it is better 
 to defer these matters until after the 1st of July next, when the ' Pub- 
 lic Worship Regulation Act,' for the correction of all abuses of this 
 kind by more simple and inexpensive proceedings, will come into 
 operation. It is perhaps these unlawful practices, as much as the 
 irregularities in the Services, which have driven so many parishioners 
 faithfully attached to the Church to any place within their reach, 
 where they can attend a Service conducted with reverence, and according 
 to the rules of the Prayer Book. Every Sunday, at all seasons and in all 
 weathers, crowds of our people may be seen on their way to Hilden- 
 borough, the nearest Church, but two miles or more distant ; others to 
 Tudely, Bidborough, and even to Tunbridge Wells. 
 
 I think that I cannot be mistaken in supposing that all this, or 
 even less, presents enough that is wrong and irregular to call for the 
 interference of the Diocesan, in order to its correction. We have 
 heard much of late about the rights of Patrons and Incumbents, and 
 but little of their duties and responsibilities ; but it is difficult to 
 believe that if the Archbishop were fully and candidly informed of the 
 condition of this parish, and not kept purposely in the dark, he would 
 so exclusively regard these rights as to be indiflPerent to the more 
 than vital claims of hundreds of souls, who are here, in a large and 
 important town in his Diocese, perishing in spiritual ignorance and 
 starvation. 
 
 I therefore make this final remonstrance to you, and shall send 
 
 a2
 
 a copy of it to the Archbisliop, requesting him to use the power which 
 the law has given him, of compelling you to present the neglects and 
 abuses above mentioned. 
 
 I am, gentlemen, your obedient servant, 
 
 Herbert N. Evans. 
 
 Dry Hill, Tonbridgb: 
 
 June Sth, 1875. 
 
 May it please Your Grace, — T beg leave to enclose to your Grace 
 a copy of a letter which I have considered it my duty to write to the 
 Churchwardens of this parish, 
 
 I apprehend that the letter enclosed will pretty fully tell the whole 
 story connected with it. I have only therefore most earnestly to en- 
 treat your Grace as soon as possible to take such steps as may seem 
 fit and proper to rescue the town from a condition which is deplor- 
 able ; and also, if the method thus adopted by me is not, by law, the 
 right one, to do me the great favour of having me informed of that 
 which is so. 
 
 I am, with great respect. 
 
 Your Grace's obedient and humble servant, 
 
 Herbert N". Evans. 
 To the most Reverend 
 
 The Lord Archbishop of Canterbury. 
 
 Dry Hill, Tonbridge: 
 
 Jul^ 30th, 1875. 
 
 May it please Your Grace, — I beg leave respectfully to remind your 
 Grace, that I have not received the promised reply to my letter of the 
 8th of Ju?fe. In that letter I drew attention to the deplorable con- 
 dition of the town of Tonbridge in spiritual things, and entreated your 
 Grace to exercise your Episcopal powers to remedy the evils of which 
 the inhabitants have repeatedly complained. At an interview with 
 which your Grace honoured me during your recent visit to Tonbridge, 
 you assured me that a reply to my letter would be sent. 
 
 At the same interview your Grace expressed a hope that the 
 arrangement for erecting a Chapel of Ease, instead of a distinct District 
 Church, would bo satisfactory to the inhabitants. I replied — as truth 
 compelled me — that it was in the highest degree unsatisfactory to 
 them. The accuracy of my statement is demonstrated by the subse- 
 quent memorial, signed even more numerously and more influentially 
 than those which preceded it, in which the subscribers declare that, so 
 far from the arrangement being satisfactory, it is highly disapproved 
 of by them.
 
 I undertake to say, from my knowledge of this place, that the 
 memorial represents the feelings of the overwhelming majority of 
 Churchmen in Tonbridge. Except the Vicar and Patron, and a few of 
 their intimate friends, the conviction is universal that their private 
 interests have been preferred to the general interests of the town. A 
 Curate, subject to the legal control of the Vicar, cannot supply the 
 spiritual wants of the place ; and we shall never be satisfied until your 
 Grace permits us to have a Church of our own, endow^ed and supported 
 by our own efi*orts, and free from the despotism in Church affairs which 
 has so long existed in Tonbridge. 
 
 I could not, without an appearance of disrespect for your Grace's 
 exalted office, describe in adequate terms the deep disappointment 
 occasioned by your recent decision. But I trust that you will not be 
 unwilling to know what is the sum of our complaints. It is this : 
 that your Grace has wholly disregarded the repeated appeals which 
 have been made, on the part of my fellow-townsmen during the last 
 three years, for redress of grave abuses and dereliction of clerical duty ; 
 and that when at last the inhabitants, by great efforts, continued for a 
 period of two years, had collected the funds for endowing a new 
 Church, and had obtained a grant from the Ecclesiastical Commis- 
 sioners, and a formal acceptance of a proper site — that when, in fact, 
 that important body had ratified our proceedings up to the final point — 
 your Grace intervened, without one word of warning or explanation, 
 and peremptorily substituted, for the scheme of the town, one promoted 
 by the Vicar and Patron in their own interest. 
 
 T will recall attention, briefly, to some of the appeals which have 
 been made to your Grace in this matter during the last three years. 
 At } our Visitation in November, 1872, you received, in a mode pre- 
 viously sanctioned by your Grace, from a highly respected parishioner, 
 a presentment praying for redress of grievances, showing statistically 
 the inadequate accommodation of the ancient parish Church, and the 
 slovenly and irregular manner in which the services were performed. 
 Xext, in the summer of 1873, the two Churchwardens complained to 
 your Grace that the parish had been left for some time before without 
 any resident Clergyman. The Vicar had been absent for several weeks, 
 and the Curate, who was left in sole charge, was believed to be residing 
 as a guest in the Patron's house, at a considerable distance from the 
 town. By your Grace's command he came for a short time to live in 
 the parish, but in November 1873 he seceded from the Church, and 
 from that time to this no regular Curate has been appointed. 
 
 These are not the only efforts which have been made to call your 
 Grace's attention to the disgraceful state of the parish. Three memo- 
 rials, signed by a large proportion of the householders and heads of 
 families, have been presented ; and the lamentable neglect of paro- 
 chial work, of visitation of the sick and poor, and the irreverent mode 
 of conducting Divine Service, led to the appointment of a committee
 
 for eslabllsliiiig a new district. I entreat your Grace to consider what 
 must }»ave been the state of things which could induce gentlemen of 
 high character and position to combine together in avowed opposition 
 to an authority, the Vicar of the parish, whom under ordinary circum- 
 stances they would have felt themselves bound to respect and support. 
 
 I repeat, emphatically, that nothing will satisfy the inhabitants but 
 a distinct Church and independent ministration. Whatever may be 
 the personal merits of the Curate of the new Chapel of Ease, he cannot 
 escape from the legal control of the Incumbent. The law empowers 
 the Incumbent to regulate the Services in the Chapel, and that power 
 exists inevitably, whether the Curate be appointed by your Grace or 
 otherwise. 
 
 Havinsf regard to these circumstances, I earnestly pray that your 
 Grace will consider the following proposal. I conclude that the Com- 
 mittee must abandon their project of a new Ciiurch : but there is 
 another part of the town in which a Church and District might be 
 established with great advantage to the inhabitants. In the lower 
 part of the town, between the two now existing Churches, there is a 
 large poor population, in number between two and three thousand — 
 partly in the parish of the mother-Church, and partly in that of St, 
 Stephen's, I venture to ask your Grace whether, if a thoroughly 
 wellrconsidered and matured scheme for a District in this part of 
 the parish were laid before your Grace, j^ou would at least take 
 it into consideration. Of course the scheme, if sanctioned, would 
 be a relief to both parishes. It is notorious that the poor population 
 of the parish of St. Stephen's are too numerous to be efficiently 
 visited by the assiduous, overworked, and conscientious Vicar, Mr. 
 Allnutt, The scheme for a district including part of his parish and 
 part of the ancient parish, and comprising nearly one-third of the 
 population of Tonbridge, is entirely distinct from, and in some 
 respects preferable to, that formerly proposed to your Grace ; and if 
 your sanction were given, we should have no difficulty in obtaining 
 another site nearly equidistant from the two existing churches. Of 
 course, if your Grace thought fit, the number of people included in the 
 district might be less or greater than that mentioned. Suffer me to 
 implore your Grace not to reject this proposal without grave delibera- 
 tion. Consider, I beseech your Grace, the fatal discouragement to all 
 independent efforts at Church extension in the Diocese of Canterbury 
 which must result from your refusal ; for it will become manifest, from 
 the history of our efforts, that in this Diocese Churchmen are practically 
 debarred from the benefit of the Acts of Parliament passed for the very 
 purpose of enabling them to establish new districts without the consent 
 of Vicars and Patrons. 
 
 I am, 3^our Grace's obedient and humble servant, 
 
 Herbert N. Evans. 
 To the most Reverend the Lord Archbishop of Canterbury,
 
 Addingtox Paek, Croydon : 
 
 August 5th, 1875. 
 
 My dear Sir, — Yonr letter of the 30th July respecting Charch 
 affairs at Tonbridge has been laid before me. From press of business 
 I have been unable to attend to it till to-day. 
 
 I have used all means in my power to ascertain what arc the real 
 feelings of the parishioners of Tonbridge, and what is for the best 
 interests of the parish ; and the conclusion at which I have arrived has 
 been that I ought to allow Mr. Deacon's very handsome offer to build 
 a Chapel of Ease and to pay the stipend of the Minister, to take the 
 place of a scheme for the subdivision of the mother parish, of which 
 !Mr. Manley is the Incumbent. 
 
 You mention complaints which have from time to time been made 
 by certain parishioners, who disapprove of Mr. Manley's mode of con- 
 ducting Divine Service and providing for the spiritual wants of his 
 parishioners. These complaints have bean carefully attended to, as 
 they were made, and I have endeavoured to estimate them at their 
 true value ; and where it appeared that there was any just ground for 
 complaint, and a remedy was within my power, I have not failed to 
 take action according to my discretion. 
 
 You now ask me to sanction a new plan for the subdivision of the 
 ancient parish of Tonbridge. You do not mention whether Mr, Allnutt 
 is a consenting party to this proposal, and as I pointed out at first, in 
 reference to your original scheme and its connection with Mr. Manley, 
 it is only fair to apply to Mr. Allnutt, as the Clergyman of the parish 
 in which you wish to build a Church, before proceeding with any 
 scheme for the subdivision of his district. It is quite possible that, 
 as in the case with Mr. Manley, Mr. Allnutt may be r&ady, by his own 
 exertions or those of his friends, to supply any proved deficiency, and 
 that he may satisfactorily establish that his district is not suflB.ciently 
 large to be subdivided. 
 
 Until all these points have been considered, I am not in a condition 
 to make any definite answer to your appeal. 
 
 I am, yours truly, 
 
 Dr. Evans, &c. &c. &c. A. C. Caxtuar. 
 
 Dry Hilx, Tonbridge: 
 
 August 19 th, 1875, 
 ]S[ay it please Your Grace, — I have to express my thanks for the 
 letter of the oth inst. with which your Grace has honoured me ; but I 
 fear that the complaints of the people of this place respecting its 
 spiritual destitution have besn misa-pprehended. Your Grace states 
 that in those complaints we express our disapproval of Mr.' Mauley's
 
 mode of conducting Divine Service and providing for tLe spiritual 
 wants of his parishioners. On the mode of doing these things there 
 might be an allowable difference of opinion ; but what we have com- 
 plained of is, that for a long time past there has been no provision 
 whatever made for these wants : that the Vicar does nothing in this 
 respect, and that we have had no Curate for nearly two years : that 
 the sick and poor are entirely without pastoral visitation : that the 
 Sacrament of Baptism is inaccessible to our sick and dying infants, and 
 that of the Lord's Supper to all who are unable to come to Church ; 
 that the Public Worship is conducted in a lawless, irregular, and irre- 
 verent manner, which is so inexpressibly painful to a large proportion 
 of the congregation as to drive them from the Church : and that our 
 National School children are neither visited nor catechised. 
 
 Your Grace observes that ' these complaints have been carefully 
 attended to as they were made,' ' estimated at their true value,' and 
 ' action taken according to your Grace's discretion.' In my last letter 
 I referred to a presentation, in the name of the parishioners, made to 
 your Grace on November 5th, 1872, and I raeutioned some of the 
 grievances of which we complained. This was received by your 
 Grace through your Commissary, and a promise given that it would be 
 answered. No notice has ever been taken of it, and nothing has been 
 done to correct the grievances complained of. 
 
 The official presentment made by the Churchwardens in the summer 
 of 1873, complaining that for some time there had been neither Vicar 
 nor Curate resident in the parish, has been productive of no action for 
 our relief except for a short time. The Vicar has been living in the 
 parish, but in a state of inactive seclusion, and we have had no Curate. 
 We are not aware that any action has been taken by your Grace in 
 any matter, except the sanction given to the scheme of a Chapel of 
 Ease, devised by the Vicar aud Patron in their own interest, and, as 
 has been proved to your Grace, utterly distasteful to the majority of 
 Churchmen in Tonbridge. 
 
 On the 8th of June last I enclosed to your Grace a copy of a 
 remonstrance made to the Churchwardens on their failure to report the 
 neglects and abuses in the parish, a short sketch of which was given. 
 I entreated your Grace to compel them to do so, and to take steps at 
 once to rescue us from a condition which is deplorable ; and also, if I 
 had not taken the right mode of bringing the matter before your 
 Grace, to inform me what was so. I have had no answer to these 
 entreaties ; two or three more months are passed, and our condition 
 is rather worse than better — we have no Curate. I think that what I 
 have stated above shows that the condition of this large parish- — ^^a 
 state of things intolerable to all Churchmen who live in it, and in- 
 credible to all who do not — has been repeatedly made known to your 
 Grace for nearly three years past, and that nothing whatever has been 
 done which has remedied a single grievance.
 
 9 
 
 As your Grace states that you have used all meaBS in your power 
 to ascertain what are the real feelings of the parishioners, I venture 
 to remark that those feelings were abundantly manifested in three 
 memorials, signed by many Clergymen, by nearly all the masters of 
 the Tonbridge School, and a large proportion of the resident members 
 of the Church of England. I submit that their representations were 
 entitled to as much credit as the private communications of the Patron 
 and his friends. I dwell on the fact that those communications were 
 private, whereas the statements and charges made on our part have 
 been made publicly, and would have been answered long ago if they 
 had been capable of answer. But we have not had a like opportunity 
 of meeting the secret attacks of the persons interested in maintaining 
 the existing monopoly in Church affairs. 
 
 With reference to a Church in the lower part of the town, your 
 Grace says : ' As I pointed out at first in reference to your original 
 scheme and its connection with Mr. Manley, it is only fair to apply to 
 Mr. Allnutt, as the Clergyman of the parish in which you wish to 
 build a Church, before proceeding with any scheme for the subdivision 
 of his district.' I trust that your Grace will acquit me of any inten- 
 tion of discourtesy, but the plain truth is that this passage is erroneous 
 as to a simple matter of fact. I must respectfully point out that in 
 your Grace's first letter, in reference to our original scheme and its 
 connection with Mr. Manley, there is not a word to the effect that it 
 would be only fair to apply to Mr. Manley. On the contrary, your 
 Grace told us how we might proceed 'if the promoters did not expect 
 to obtain the co-operation of the Vicar to their scheme.' I enclose a 
 copy of your Grace's letter [inf. p. 10] in order that you may see that 
 at that time you did not consider that it was necessary to apply to Mr. 
 Manley in the first instance, but contemplated our having a Clergyman 
 with charge of a Peel- district, who would be quite independent of the 
 Vicar of the parish. 
 
 Permit me to submit to your Grace that the Acts under which 
 ' Particular or Patronage Districts ' may be formed, after notice given 
 to Patrons who have an option of building the required Churches 
 themselves, belong to a different set of Acts ; but under the Peel- 
 Blandford Acts there is no such option, nor is the consent of the 
 Patron or Incumbent required. The main object of the statesmen 
 who introduced those Acts was to encourage independent efforts at 
 Church-extension. In his speech on Church Extension in the House of 
 Commons (May 5th, 1843), Sir Robert Peel said : ' I trust that when 
 a Clergyman is appointed under this arrangement, it will always occur, 
 or at least it will be the general rule, to assign to such Clergyman a 
 particular district. Instead of making him subsidiary to the Incum- 
 bent of a parish Church, I trust that it will be arranged that a dis- 
 trict shall be assigned to him, so that his exertions will be accompanied 
 with full responsibility, and that he may have an opportunity of de-
 
 10 
 
 riving all tlie advantages resulting from a personal intimacy with bis 
 parishioners.' (Hansard, vol. Ixviii., p. 1278.) 
 
 We have assured your Grace more than once that we have no 
 desire to introduce any peculiarities of ritual or ornament, and as to 
 that point we are willing to accept the most stringent test that your 
 Grace may be pleased to impose. Bat we do desire to have a Church 
 in which the Services may be conducted solemnly, reverently, and 
 heartily, and as the rules of the Church direct. This, we trust, cannot 
 be thought an unreasonable request : we simply ask for that which is 
 the right of all Englishmen — religious liberty — the opportunity of 
 worshijDping according to our consciences, and according to law. 
 
 I make this final appeal to your Grace to reconsider whether it is 
 just and right in itself, or conducive to the best interests of the parish, 
 to set aside the Acts of Parliament framed to meet such cases as ours, 
 and to prefer private interests to the rights of a large community of 
 loyal and. faithful members of the Church. I also entreat your Grace 
 to ascertain for yourself the grievous evils under which the whole 
 parish, and especially the sick and poor, have so long suffered, and 
 still suffer, from abuses and neglect ; and if I may be permitted to do 
 so, beg that this be done, not by private questioning, but by public 
 Commission. 
 
 I am, your Grace's most obedient humble servant, 
 
 Heebeet N". Evans. 
 
 To the most E-everend the Lord Archbishop of Canterbury. 
 
 [copy.] 
 
 ' Addingtok" Park, Croydon : 
 
 ' October 14, 1873. 
 
 * Reverend and dear Sir, — I bag leiive to acknowledge the receipt 
 of your letter of the 9th inst., enclosing a memorial signed by house- 
 holders and heads of families in Tonbridge on the subject of the want 
 of Church accommodation in that town. 
 
 ' As the promoters of this scheme which you have laid before me 
 are not in a position, as you state, to raise sufficient sums to build and 
 endow a new permanent Church, there are two courses only open 
 to them — 
 
 * (1) One course is, without seeking for a legal division of the 
 parish, to induce the Vicar of Tonbridge to allow the erection of a 
 temporary Church in his parish, while they undertake to provide the 
 stipend of the Curate who is to officiate therein; which Curate would 
 be under the direction of the Vicar, like any other duly licensed Curate, 
 except so far as there may be an agreement to the contrary. 
 
 * (2) If the promoters do not expect to obtain the co-operation of 
 the Vicar to their scheme, on their offering to the Ecclesiastical Com- 
 missioners £3,000 for endowments, and proposing to include in a new
 
 11 
 
 district a popnlation of 4,000 persons, they may get assigned a district 
 under the Peel-Blandford Acts, with a view of ultimately erecting a 
 permanent Church, when the money for such a purpose, in addition to 
 the £3,000 for endowments, is forthcoming. Under these circum- 
 stances the Commissioners would probably make a grant of such an 
 amount, to meet the £3,000, that the joint interest would be £150 per 
 annum, to be paid as a stipend to the Clergyman undertaking the 
 charge of the Peel district ; and he would be quite independent of the 
 Vicar of the parish. 
 
 ' Believe me to be, yours faithfully, 
 
 The E,ev. J. Lanorhorne.' ' A. C. Cantuar. 
 
 ' Supposing a Peel district to be formed, I know nothing to prevent 
 the income of the Incumbent from being increased by a supplement 
 from the pew-rents in the temporary Church.' 
 
 Addixgton Park, Ceotdon: 
 
 September 20, 1875. 
 
 My deae Sie, — I have, on my return from the Continent, received 
 your letter of August 19th. 
 
 Respecting other parts of your letter, I do not think it necessary to 
 say more than I have previously communicated to you. Bat in this 
 letter I find the following statement : ' What we have complained of 
 is that for a long time past there has been no provision whatever made 
 (i.e., in the Parish Church District of Tonbridge) for these wants 
 (that is, for the spiritual wants of the parishioners) : that the Vicar does 
 nothing in this respect, and that we have had no Curate for nearly two 
 years : that the sick and poor are entirely without pastoral visita- 
 tion : that the Sacrament of Baptism is inaccessible to our sick and 
 dying infants, and that of the Lord's Supper to all who are unable to 
 come to Church ; that public worship is conducted in a lawless, 
 irregular, and irreverent manner, which is so inexpressibly painful to 
 a large proportion of the congregation as to drive them from the 
 Church ; and that our National School children are neither visited nor 
 Catechised,' You add : ' I entreat your Grace to ascertain for yourself 
 the grievous evils under which the whole parish, and especially the 
 sick and poor, have so long suffered, and still suffer, from abuses and 
 neglect; and if I may be permitted to do so, I beg that this be done, 
 not by private questioning, but by public Commission.' 
 
 I now beg leave to inform you that I have conferred witli Mr, 
 Manley as to the subject of your letter, and that he concurs with me 
 in the propriety of calling upon you either to substantiate or withdraw 
 the statements in your letter to which I have alluded. 
 
 In the event of your refusing to withdraw these statements, and 
 desiring that I should do so, I am quite ready to issue a Commission
 
 12 
 
 to enquire into the allegations ; and in the event of your failing to 
 substantiate them, Mr. Manley will take his own course to vindicate 
 his character. 
 
 I am, yours truly. 
 
 Dr. Evans. A. C. Cantuar. 
 
 Dry Hill, Tonbridge : 
 
 October 12, 1875. 
 
 May it please Your Grace, — I have been prevented by illness from 
 answering your Grrace's letter of September 20th. 
 
 The statements which your Grace quotes from my letter of August 
 19th respecting the condition of this parish, and which your Grace 
 calls on me either to substantiate or withdraw, are all true, and 
 notorious in the place. I cannot withdraw any one of them, but am pre- 
 pared to prove them by abundant evidence, before the Commission to 
 enquire into them, which your Grace tells me that you are quite ready 
 to issue. But I will not render myself liable for any law expenses. I 
 hold no official position in the parish, and am not therefore under any 
 obligation to incur them. 
 
 I do not understand that your Grace proposes a statutory enquiry 
 under the Church Discipline Act, which relates to offences against the 
 * Laws Ecclesiastical ; ' whereas several of the complaints against the 
 Vicar of Tonbridge, e.g., neglect to visit the sick and the parish 
 schools, would not come under that denomination, especially in a 
 criminal suit. Moreover, I am advised by the Proctor whom I have con- 
 sulted that the expense of such proceedings would be at least £1,000, 
 and might greatly exceed that sum. But I presume that it is your 
 Grace's intention to institute an enquiry quite inexpensively, by com- 
 missioning some competent and independent person or persons to take 
 evidence and report to your Grace. If I am right in my conjecture in 
 this respect, T gladly accept your Grace's offer of issuing a Commission 
 for the purpose which I mentioned, namely — that your Grace may 
 ascertain for yourself the neglect of the parish for years past. 
 
 I am, your Grace's obedient servant, 
 
 Herbert N". Evans. 
 To the most Reverend 
 
 The Lord Archbishop of Canterbury. 
 
 Elairlogie, Stirling : 
 
 October 20tk, 1875. 
 
 My dear Sir, — Your letter of the 12th has followed me to this 
 place. 1 gather from the letter that you are not prepared to make 
 any accusations against the Vicar of Tonbridge before a court having 
 power to sift evidence and examine witnesses on oath. Your com-
 
 13 
 
 plaints, therefore, resolve themselves into a general expression of dis- 
 satisfaction as to the way in which the Vicar has fulfilled his duties. 
 Supposing that I were to commission three persons, in an informal way 
 to inquire into the accuracy of your impressions and allegations, and 
 they were to report unfavourably to the Vicar, I do not know what I 
 could do more in the matter than see, as I have already done, that the 
 Vicar has an efficient and proper representative during his leave of 
 absence on account of ill-health, and that his representative has such 
 assistance in the care of the parish as is requisite ; while if the persons 
 commissioned reported in favour of the Vicar you would probably not 
 be satisfied. 
 
 Such a legal Commission of Enquiry under the Church Discipline 
 Act as you not unnaturally shrink from, might possibly produce 
 diflferent results ; but on the whole I think you act wisely in declining, 
 on full consideration, to promote such an enquiry, and I trust you will 
 find, on reflection, that all has been done in this matter which the cir- 
 cumstances of the case permit of, as just and fair to all parties con- 
 cerned. 
 
 I remain, your faithful servant, 
 
 Dr. Evans, Tonbridge. A. C. Cantuar. 
 
 P.S. — I am sorry to hear of your ill-health. 
 
 DfiY Hill, Tonbridge : 
 
 November 8th, 187o. 
 
 Mat it please Yode Gracu, — I have received your Grace's letter 
 of October 20th, which you have done me the honour to send me. 
 
 In the former one of September 20th your Grace called on me, as 
 the result of a conference with the Vicar, either to substantiate or with^ 
 draw my statements respecting the neglect of the parish ; and if I 
 refused to withdraw them, and desired that you should do so, your 
 Grace informed me that you were quite ready to issue a Commission to 
 enquire into the allegations. To this I replied that the statements are 
 all true, and notorious in the place ; that I cannot withdraw any one 
 ot them, but am prepared to prove them by abundant evidence ; that I 
 gladly accept your Grace's offer of a Commission, but will not render 
 myself liable for any law expenses. From these words yoar Grace 
 gathers the direct contrary — that I am not prepared, and shrink from 
 and decline enquiry. In order that there may be no mistake as to the 
 party which declines investigation, I repeat to your Grace that I do 
 not shrink from the strictest enquiry, if your Grace will fulfil your 
 promise of issuing a Commission for that purpose. If this Commission 
 consists of competent and independent persons, who will give us a 
 fair hearing, I am confident that the result will satisfy the people of 
 Tonbridge. It would be perfectly indifferent to the witnesses how 
 much their evidence were sifted, and whether they were examined on 
 oath or not. 
 
 Why your Grace now declines to grant the Commission which you
 
 14 
 
 so recently told me that you were quite ready to issue, and how I am 
 to substantiate my statements when your Grace withholds the Commis- 
 sion before which you have called on me to do so, I am at a loss to 
 imagine. If, indeed, the only way by which your Grace could satisfy 
 yourself of their truth were an expensive lawsuit, the refusal to incur 
 law expenses might give some colour to the construing that refusal as 
 a shrinking from enquiry; but I am instructed that a compulsory 
 report from the Churchwardens is the legal course to take in cases like 
 ours, and this I earnestly entreated your Grace several months ago to 
 require of them. On the 12th of June, when your Grace honoured 
 me with an audience in Tonbridge, they both were ushered into your 
 presence as I left it : they could have informed you of the truth or 
 falsehood of my complaints. Besides these methods, the case which 
 your Grace puts before me as a supposition shows, I presume, that 
 Buch a proceeding is open to you if you were willing to adopt it. 
 
 The statements made by me have been before the public since 
 June 8th last; there has been ample time for the Vicar to vindicate his 
 character ; but neither he nor, as far as I can ascertain, any other 
 person has ever impugned the truth of one word of them. They are not, 
 as your Grace calls them, impressions — general expressions of dissatisfac- 
 tion as to the way in which the Yicar has fulfilled his duties, but 
 plain statements of facts, with exact dates and statistics, showing that 
 he has not fulfilled his most important duties in any way — and, as a con- 
 Bequence, the deplorable state of the parish. The names only are 
 omitted, and these I can produce whenever required to do so. 
 
 When calling on me to substantiate the statements, your Grace 
 does not tell me which of them are denied: some of them carry their 
 own means of verification : e.g.^ your Grace knows whether you have 
 licensed any Curate to Tonbridge since November 1873; and that 
 relating to the Schools can be verified in a few minutes by looking at 
 the School Log-book. 
 
 In answering the last part of your Grace's letter I feel considerable 
 difficulty. If I say nothing, your Grace may suppose that I concur in 
 it ; if I answer it truthfully, I may seem to forget what is due to your 
 Grace's high position in the Church. In a sort of appeal to me you 
 say, ' I trust you will find on reflection that all has been done in this 
 matter which the circumstances of the case permit of, as just and fair 
 to all parties concerned.' 
 
 No amount of reflection will make me think it is just and fair to 
 decide any cause without hearing both sides. Neither can I consider it 
 iust and fair that your Grace should make a statement most injurious 
 to the character of several Clergymen and gentlemen, and when it ia 
 proved to your Grace that such statement is not true, instead of with- 
 drawing it, you should virtually repeat it, by stating, ' I do not think it 
 necessary to say more than I have previously communicated to you.' 
 
 As to two of the parties concerned, namely, tLe Patron and the
 
 15 
 
 Vicar, it cannot be just and fair to them to sanction the sacrifice of the 
 spiritual welfare of the parishioners to their private interests ; that is 
 to frustrate the very end for which they, as Patron and Vicar, exist. 
 The third party consists of a large portion of the loyal Churchmen of 
 the parish. I cannot think that all has been done for them that could 
 be, or alter the view which, with almost all my townsmen, I hold, and 
 have expressed in my former letters to your Grace. They have asked for 
 nothing but what is accordant with the law and their rights, and your 
 Grace has denied it them. For three years they have tried in vain every 
 means which they could devise to obtain the redress of their grievances 
 at your Grace's hands, the chief of these grievances being that the 
 Vicar gave no pastoral care, and that we had no Curate. During the last 
 two months a representative of the absent Vicar has been living here, but 
 he has been and still is alone and unassisted, except by any Clergyman 
 who can be procured for the occasion ;* although your Grace stated to 
 me, on October 20th last, that you had ' already seen that he has such 
 assistance as is requisite.' I do not doubt that he will do all that is in 
 his power, but for one Clergyman to perform the pastoral duties of 
 this parish is impossible. 
 
 I now make an end of a correspondence which has been a very 
 painful one to me, and which I should never have begun unless I had 
 hoped that as soon as the neglect in this large parish was fully made 
 known to your Grace, it would be enquired into and rectified. In this 
 hope I have been disappointed, and now that your Grace tells me that 
 the complaints of what we have considered most serious delinquencies 
 are mere impressions, I feel that it is useless to continue it. 
 
 I am, your Grace's most obedient and humble servant, 
 
 Herbert N. Evans. 
 The most Reverend 
 
 The Lord Archbishop of Canterbury. 
 
 2 Broad Sanctuary, Westminster, S.W. : 
 
 November Wth, 187o. 
 
 Sir, — I am desired by the Archbishop of Canterbury to acknow- 
 ledge the receipt of your letter of November 8. 
 
 His Grace agrees with you that no good purpose would be sub- 
 served by your further continuing the correspondence; and would 
 only remark, in conclusion, that he understands your repeated state- 
 ment that ' you decline to render yourself liable for any law expenses 
 in connection with the Commission of Enquiry, to be tantamount to 
 your stating that you decline his offer to issue such a Commission as 
 alone would enter on an investigation of the complaints you have 
 
 * This is still true, December 3, 1875.
 
 made with any hope of arriving at a just decision. You are aware, as 
 you have yourself stated, that his Grace has long since received full 
 reports from the Churchwardens, and any further investigation could 
 only be satisfactorily conducted by a Commission under the Act, which 
 he understands you to decline. 
 
 Believe me to be, sir, yours truly, 
 
 John B. Lee. 
 Herbert N. Evans, Esq., 
 Dry Hill, Tonbridge. 
 
 From the ' Tonbridge Free Press^ of June 19, August 28, and 
 Novemler 13, 1875. 
 
 LOXIJOS : nilXTKI) liY 
 
 SPOTTI3\VOODE AND CO., SEW-STRKlir SgUAUK 
 
 AND J'ARMAMKNT STREET
 
 'aw- :.4fc?j»«»sii&aK:5::
 
 fm 
 
 s.'-'%. 
 
 Em 
 
 
 f> 
 
 "tr 
 
 
 jlif