The occasion of the dispute is a satirical commentary upon the doctrine of toleration in the Church of England. It shows in a striking manner the want of esprit de corps among the different sections of the Anglican Church in the colonies. It shows, too, that some of the clergy, and even members of the episcopal bench have little sympathy with their brethren who do not hold pronounced party views. The action of Bishop Hadfield is extreme, but even in the colonies it is not altogether with out precedent. To us it seems alto gether unworthy of the broad and liberal view a Bishop should take of his office.
Canon Howell, the gentleman who has caused all the uproar, acted for some months as locum tenen-a in Wel lington. He bears an exalted charac ter, and as a clergyman and in private life was very popular. He is, however, unmistakably " high " in his doctrinal views, and during his tenure of office displayed, how wisely or unwisely we cannot say, his High Church pro clivities. It is, however, very unusual? for a Bishop to take the extreme step of inhibiting a clergyman from preaching in his diocese unless for some grave moral delin quencies. This unwise step Bishop Hadfield took, and as Canon Howell holds an important post in Dunedin, the Bishop and Synodsmen of that diocese naturally feel themselves in sulted, and a foolish action that ought never to have been taken threatens seriously to imperil the peace of the Church.
