|
Plain Text Transcription |
From Edward Kilvington at Fenstanton near St Ives, Huntingdonshire, to T.H. at Aldwincle. He is very grateful for the interest that T.H. is taking in his affairs and Kilvington is hopeful that their efforts may be attended with success. Since he last wrote, the Vicar has taken the matter up again and has sent the following letter to the Bishop of Lincoln [George Pretyman Tomline], which Kilvington thinks will be difficult to counter: Since I was honored with your last favor, I have made further enquiries about Mr Kilvington [and] the parishioners in general greatly desire his continuance, are not offended by his manner of performing services [and] do not think it enthusiastic, but only grave and serious, and this [they] are ready to testify; and who above all the rest made Mr Cowling so skilful a judge I wonder much, who in a list of proper persons for the office of churchwarden, after I had disapproved of him, pointed out to me this very Mr Coope, whom he had before complained of to your Lordship as an improper person. The only offense ever given Mr Kilvington’s requesting to have of him a piece of close [land] for his house, which he thought belonged to the glebe (land traditionally set aside for the user of the parish priest) but did not, but this is not the first instance wherein I have found Mr Cowling false – a man whom none in the whole parish, but his dependents, I understand, will be concerned with. Nothing therefore is alleged against Mr Kilvington but what is fully answered. The grounds on which I consented to his removal being done away, I cannot, unless his character be too great a contrast for some of his neighboring brethren, conscientiously and with any comfort remove him. As my residence would be of no benefit to the parishes, being past 60, so crippled with the gout, incapable either to dress or undress myself [and] expecting every year to be my last. I am unable to do any duty Your Lordship then will not, I trust, call for it in my particular case, unless you require it generally from all your clergy. I humbly once more entreat, as your Lordship has condescended to give Mr Cowling a hearing, that in justice you will also admit Mr Kilvington to an audience, whereby you can discern if he is that enthusiast, he is by his enemies so basely and maliciously represented…John Cook. PS It is very hard, after having with difficulty obtained a resident curate, one wicked implacable man should so disorder the whole parish. The bishop has not yet responded to the letter, but Kilvington will be surprised if the matter is not now dropped – ‘if [Thomas] Erskine’s (brother of the evangelical Lady Anne Erskine and a prominent lawyer who rose to the position of Lord Chancellor) [legal] opinion should coincide with Mr Smith’s, Dr Jowett advises that we consult Sir William Scott (Sir William Scott, Lord Stowell, was a prominent lawyer and Judge of the High Court of Admiralty), as the bishop, if he proceeds at all, will in all probability proceed ecclesiastically (Through the ecclesiastical courts as opposed to the secular), it seems quite necessary that we should have the opinion of a civilian (Civil law as distinguished from Common law) and there are particular reasons why Sir William Wynne (Sir William Wynne Knight was a prominent lawyer and Master Keeper or Commissary of the Prerogative Court of Canterbury) should not be the person applied to – should it be agreed on all hands, as I hope it will, that the bishop is unable to proceed against Mr [John] Cook, I shall certainly stand my ground. I should think it indeed an unwarrantable desertion of my post to act otherwise – A friend has just undertaken to have the whole of the case laid before Mr [William] Pitt (the Prime Minister) and should all other means fail, I shall think it a duty to try what effect political influence may have…’ On the whole, Kilvington is optimistic that the matter will be resolved. Kilvington’s wife joins in sending her best wishes. (1 sheet, 3p.) 17 July 1794 |
Thomas Haweis Documents and Images at Bridwell Library
