President to back me up, he agreed to give up his engagement and assist at the hearing of the case. The Court was finally composed of Lords Langdale and Campbell, Baron Parke, Vice-Chancellor Knight Bruce, Dr. Lushington, and Mr. Pemberton Leigh. Lord Lansdowne came the first day and opened the proceedings; made a short speech, stating that Her Majesty had been advised to summon the prelates in so important a case, and that he himself did not contemplate attending throughout the hearing, as he did not consider himself competent to act as a Judge in that Court, though always ready to render his assistance in arranging their proceedings, and then having fairly launched them he went away. The cause was very elaborately and very ably argued by Turner for Gorham, and Baddeley for the Bishop. The Court was crammed full almost every day, and the interest very great. It was conducted with great moderation and decorum on all sides, with one exception. At the end of his speech Baddeley very injudiciously and very indecently made a personal attack on the Archbishop of Canterbury. He charged him with having given a living to a man holding Gorham's opinions, and therefore being prejudiced in this case. The Prelate, with some emotion, but very mildly, explained that he had given the living to the clergyman in question before he had published the book in which these opinions were said to be enunciated, and that he knew nothing about them. Baddeley made a sort of apology, and Campbell rebuked him with some severity, but at the same time acknowledged the ability of his speech, and, with this exception, its moderation and becoming tone. When the arguments were over, the Lords remained in discussion for some time. The Prelates all said they should like to take time to consider their opinions, and then to give them in writing. It was therefore agreed that they should meet again on the 15th, when they would read their written opinions to the Judicial Committee; and it was also settled that Lord Langdale should draw up the Report. There was not much discussion, but it was evident from what passed that the judgement would be reversed. Yesterday afternoon they assembled again. The Archbishop of Canterbury began. His paper was excellent. He showed that opinions, if not identical with, yet very like, those of Gorham had been held by a host of great and good Churchmen, and he was strongly of opinion that the Bishop was not justified in refusing to induct him. The Archbishop of York followed. He gave the same opinion, but in a much less able paper. Then came the Bishop of London. He said he entirely agreed with the two Archbishops, so far as they had gone; intimated that his first impression had been the same as theirs, but in looking more closely into Gorham's doctrine he had arrived at the conclusion that he had gone considerably beyond what had ever been held by any of the eminent persons whom the Archbishop had quoted, and that he had distinctly laid down positions