Files
Download
Download Full Text (10.6 MB)
Content Warning
The Philander Chase letters were written in the 18th and 19th century and therefore may contain language that we understand today as harmful or offensive. You may encounter paternalist descriptions of Native Americans, racial slurs, or sexism. For more information, see our policy page.
Description
Marriott details the resolution of a dispute between bishops and discusses recent subscriptions and support in England for Chase's cause.
Date
5-11-1824
City
London
Keywords
Bishop Chase, Bishop Hobart, subscriptions, Ohio, Diocese, England voyage
Recommended Citation
Marriott, G.W., "Letter to R. M. Caldecott" (1824). Philander Chase Letters. 233.
https://digital.kenyon.edu/chase_letters/233
Rights Statement
Transcript
May 11. 1824
My dear Robt.
I never saw your letter till Post-time had very nearly arrived, and could only send the printed paper of Bishop H. to you, as a proof that amity and union were restored between him and Bp. C. I now proceed, according to my promise, to detail certain facts, which will do away all doubt on the subject. When I knew Bp. H. only by having dined once in his company, a correspondence took place between a friend of this Bp. and myself, on the subject of the questions then on the [tapis] between him and Bp. C. & my Correspondent having sent my letters to Bp. H., the Bp. called on me. He expressed his approbation of my sentiments, especially with reference to an endeavor to quench, by some conciliatory measure, those unhappy feelings which otherwise might lead to a mischievous schism in an infant Church. This was followed by our instantly [drawing] up preliminaries of peace, on the observance of which Bp. H. undertook to support, instead of opposing, the subscription for Ohio. The single item of union, between the general Seminary and Ohio for subscriptions, was objected to by Bp. C., who cordially hailed the opportunity and prospect of peace. I own I did not then feel convinced that this objection was necessary, tho’ I had no doubt of the Bp.s full and most conscientious persuasion that it was so. I am now entirely of the same opinion, without an iota of doubt attaching to the subject, and further believe that the object of union would have been defeated, rather than promoted, by writing for subscriptions, especially in America, where two parties already existed, and this measure would have created a third. That this single objection did not prevent the treaty Bp. H’s printed Paper fully [shews].
The principal objection of Bp. H. to the measures of Bp. C. (for of no personal difference have we heard) were, as expressed in his published letter, “the expediency of avoiding all application to a foreign source” for the American Church, “a sentiment of national pride which renders many averse to our Church lowering herself to the attitude of a supplicant for foreign bounty,” and the hope that “if this office, so humiliating to the Church, must be performed, it would not be assumed by one of her highest Officers.” These objections would have ceased, if no reconciliation had occurred, having been removed by Bp. Hobart’s newly adopted line of conduct.
On the queries you suggest I could say much. The reception of Bp. C. by the Heads of our Hierarchy has certainly been most encouraging. A prejudice had been created in the mind of the Primate, who conceived the authority of the House of Bishops was excluded by the Constitution of the Ohio Seminary; and the Archbp. of York thought that Bp. C’s Diocese was within the province of New York, and consequently that Bp. H’s authority was decisive and ought to regulate the question. On both these points their Graces were better informed by the Bp., and both immediately promised their support to his measure. The Bp.s of London, Durham, St. David’s, St. Asaph, Chester, Lichfield and Limerick have since done so, and the rest of the Bench will be addressed without delay. The Bishop of Durham has declared his subscription, which will be £100. The Countess Dowager of Rosse has sent £200, and £100 to the Bishop for his personal benefit, which he has requested to be allowed to apply to the erection of a Chapel for the College in Ohio. The highest orders are daily more and more, as they are informed of the subscription, encouraging the measure. All I know of Mr Norris’s present feelings is from Lord Kenyon, who told me that he met Mr N at Lambeth on Saturday, where he said he would support Bishop Chase, if he would unite with Bishop Hobart for subscriptions. On this Lord K. observed that there could be no objection remaining in Mr. N’s mind on the score of principle.
I heartily wish success to your exertions for Bp. Chase’s measure. His object appears to me most truly Christian; and, while his Mission any ardor is beyond any modern example I know, I cannot discern a spark of fanaticism either in his principles or feelings. As to the dissensions alluded to it is hardly fair to consider him a party in them. They neither in the smallest degree originated with him, nor were adopted by him. He has not resorted to recrimination, nor even to self-vindication, tho’, to my knowledge, goaded to both these by Friends in England, and by Friends and Relations in America; but has acted up to the spirit of every profession so uniformly made in favor of union and peace; and has thus, I have not the least doubt, but best consulted the welfare of the whole Church, and the prosperity of his measure for the benefit of his own Diocese.
I am yr.s affect.y,
G. W. M.
Queen Square
May 11th 1824
To Robert Marriott Caldecott [?]
[Brazenose] Coll:
Oxford