station, to our communications with the Bishop. Our first application for redress was received with stately coldness; our motives were misunderstood, our tone was reprehended, our attachment to the Church attributed to fancy; and the use of the Surplice upheld. Then a change apparently came over our Diocesan. The Surplice was to be laid aside, the offensive expressions in Mr. Smith's sermons were to be noticed, the memorial to be examined, mutual respect and affection, concession and forbearance, enjoined. In a corresponding spirit was this met by us; we were thankful,— and it was being thankful for a small matter-that the white badge of the Tractarian party should no longer be displayed. We could not imagine Mr. Smith would be contumacious, or could we doubt the sincerity of the Bishop. Again the scene changed: Mr. Smith clings with tenacity to the Surplice; and our next remonstrance was replied to by the Bishop, in a letter which we will only say we have endeavoured to answer, and to that answer we must refer the Public.

It has been said that "the mongrel Romanism, which was so suddenly and rashly thrown into collision with the plain honesty of the middle classes, has been broken to pieces, like a potter's vessel, by their good feeling and good sense." It finds, however, a shelter and respite under the eye and in the presence of the Bishop of Exeter. We have hitherto failed in our endeavours to oppose it.

Since the subjoined correspondence took place, this Parish has empowered its Churchwardens to inquire into the legality of some of the proceedings in the Chapel of St. John's. They have been pronounced illegal. The Parish has further authorised their Churchwardens to request the interference of the Bishop, and the answer to that request has obliged us to publish our correspondence. It is for the Parish now to declare whether they will support their Officers in the exercise of these their undoubted rights, and what ulterior measures they will pursue.

Torquay, July 10th, 1845.

CORRESPONDENCE.

Reply of the Rev. Parks Smith, to a Communication made to him by the Churchwardens.

SIR,

Torremount, 18th January, 1845.

AFTER the prominent part you have taken in the public proceedings relative to the Services at St. John's, I need scarcely add that a personal interview at this time, would, I imagine, be equally unpleasant to you as to myself. I must therefore request you will have the kindness to give the Address to the bearer, who, 1 doubt not, will deliver it safely into the hands of

Your Obedient Servant,

To W. Kitson, Esq., Torquay.

W. G. PARKS SMITH.

SIR,

Torquay, 18th January, 1845.

As you have declined receiving the Address, personally, from the Churchwardens and certain members of your Congregation, who intended waiting on you with it, it only remains for us, who have been entrusted with it officially as Churchwardens, to send it to you, and to request the favor of your answer as soon as convenient.

We are Your very Obedient

ADDRESS.

REV. SIR,

To the Rev. W. G. Parks Smith.

WE, the undersigned Members of the Congre

gation of Saint John's, and Churchwardens of the Parish of

Tormoham, feel ourselves called upon to address you upon the subject of the recent innovations in the conduct of Divine Worship of our Chapel.

Whilst these questions were under the consideration of the Bishop of the Diocese we refrained from remonstrating with you, but now that he has withdrawn his order for the Surplice, and urged his Clergy to consult the wishes of their Congregations, we request you to act upon his injunctions— "to perform the worship of God according to the real ordinances of the Church in all their fulness, if you will, but also in all their simplicity and all their purity; to avoid all unauthorised innovation, above all that worst species of innovation, the revival of by-gone usages not ordered by the Church, which are associated in our minds with the remembrances of the superstitions and corruptions of Rome."

We object especially to the use of the Surplice in the Pulpit, as "resting upon no express command of the Church"; and necessarily "a symbol of dis-union amongst ourselves," whilst the gown is used in the Parish Church, and Trinity Chapel, and almost universally throughout the Kingdom.

We object to it as the symbol of a Sect whose acknowledged object is to subvert the distinctive principles of the Protestant Reformation, and whose views have been pronounced heretical in the University whence they originated. With such a party we cannot suffer ourselves to be identified.

We object, also, to the interruption occasioned in our devotions by the unusual number of the officiating Clergy,by the novel ceremonies, the genuflexions and turnings to the Communion Table when repeating the Creeds and Prayers: ceremonies trivial in themselves, but consistent only with the Doctrines of an Altar and the presence of the Host, as taught in the Romish Church.

We object, also, to the principle of some of the alterations in the Chancel, which we understand were made without the sanction of the Bishop or the Trustees.

We further request, that the Psalmody may be conducted with that simplicity which may enable the congregation to take their part; that the Service may not be unnecessarily lengthened by Chanting, to which the Bishop and the Congregation equally object: and that our attention may no more be distracted from the vital substance of our Religion by ever varying novelties in its external forms.

In these Remonstrances we have the concurrence of the many valuable members of your Congregation, who have been

driven from the Chapel, and the almost unanimous voice of of other Congregations in the Parish.

I MUST preface my reply to your letter received with the address, from certain members of my congregation, by an assurance, that until it reached me, I was not aware of their intention of accompanying you; your first note on that subject, having intimated only, that you held the address, from which, I naturally inferred that you alone would present it: I explain this, that none of them may imagine any personal disrespect was intended by me.

Being anxious however to allay, as far as is in my power, the excitement which your public proceedings have, as it appears to me, unnecessarily caused in this place, Í shall offer a few comments on the address itself, and appeal to your feelings, as a Christian, to receive my remarks in the same conciliatory spirit in which I offer them; and although I cannot recognise the propriety of any individual, not a member of my congregation," remonstrating" with me, still, I will even waive this point, and consider the several subjects presented by you to my notice; though I must indeed add, I could sincerely have wished, that your requests had been made known to me in a very different manner, and for your sake, as well as for some of those, whose signatures have swelled the list of objectors, to the number of forty-four, I

could have desired, that the tone of communication had been more in accordance with the spirit and practice of our holy Religion, as it would have enabled me to meet you on more even ground. I cannot however but regard your "remonstrance," as the act of the few, with whom it originated, for many, I am willing to believe, signed it without consideration, and I regret to perceive, that of all which I have seen in print, this, is pre-eminently conspicuous for its deficiency in those sure accompaniments of a good cause, forbearance, love, charity and respect. Far, however, be it from me to return evil for evil.

I will now consider the respective divisions of the "Remonstrance" as they occur.

The first asserts, that all the undersigned, are members of my congregation.

To this, I object, that there are some signatures of persons, who are not members and whose names therefore should not have been added to this requisition. I need scarcely add, a fact, already so well known, that you have appeared at St. John's, I believe but twice, during the seven years of my incumbency, whilst your colleague Mr. Raby, has, to the best of my belief, never been seen there at all.

To a compliance with the second clause, I cannot possibly object; I "desire not to revive by-gone usages, not ordered by the Church"; but it is from the Church, and the laws of the Church, that I must ascertain what usages are by-gone, and what are still binding on me as a Minister of the Church of England. To those laws, I have repeatedly pledged myself in the 36th Canon, in the following words, "That the Book of Common Prayer, and of ordering of Bishops, Priests, and Deacons, containeth in it nothing contrary to the word of God, and that it may lawfully so be used; and that I myself will use the form in the said Book prescribed, in public Prayer, and Administration of the Sacraments, and none other."

With reference to the use of the Surplice, I cannot agree with your views of it. You regard it as simply objectionable, from being as you state, "the badge of a party.” Believe me, I view it in quite another light.-I consider it as the only recognised dress of an officiating Priest or Deacon of the Reformed Church of England, and as such alone, do I assume it. Authority sufficient for its use, I find in the Rubric before the order for Morning Prayer, and in the 58th Canon; and although from circumstances, our excellent Diocesan may have been induced to withdraw that portion