One point now seemed to be gained towards his re-transplantation into his native soil, after he had resisted considerable offers had he continued in Kent; and thus did he think himself virtually in possession of a living in Derbyshire, which in its nature was tenable with Godmersham in Kent. Henceforward, then, he no doubt felt a satisfaction that he should soon be enabled to live in Derbyshire, and occasionally visit his friends in Kent, instead of residing in that county, and visiting his friends in Derbyshire. But, after all this assiduity and anxiety (as if _admission_ and _ejection_ had pursued him a second time), the result of Mr. Pegge's expectations was far from answering his then present wishes; for, when he thought himself secure by the Dean's nomination, and that nothing was wanting but the Bishop's licence, the Dean's _right of Patronage_ was controverted by the Parishioners of Brampton, who brought forward a Nominee of their own. The ground of this claim, on the part of the Parish, was owing to an ill-judged indulgence of some former Deans of Lincoln, who had occasionally permitted the Parishioners to send an Incumbent directly to the _Bishop_ for his licence, without the intermediate nomination of the _Dean_ in due form. These measures were principally fomented by the son of the last Incumbent, the Rev. Seth Ellis, a man of a reprobate character, and a disgrace to his profession, who wanted the living, and was patronised by the Parish. He had a desperate game to play; for he had not the least chance of obtaining any preferment, as no individual Patron, who was even superficially acquainted with his _moral_ character alone, could with decency advance him in the church. To complete the detail of the fate of this man, whose interest the deluded part of the mal-contents of the parish so warmly espoused, he was soon after suspended by the Bishop from officiating at Brampton[13]. [13] The Bishop's Inhibition took place soon after the decision of the cause at Derby, and was not revoked till late in the year 1758, which was principally effected by Mr. Pegge's intercession with his Lordship, stating Mr. Ellis's distressed circumstances, and his having made a proper submission, with a promise of future good behaviour. This revocation is contained in a letter addressed to Mr. Pegge, under the Bishop's own hand, dated Oct. 30, 1758.