y of the Cabinet, by proxy, that they
should also perform all religious acts in their own person ... I have
been informed, though I will not answer for the accuracy of the
information, that this vicarious oath is likely to produce, a scene
which would have puzzled the _Dudor Dubitantiim._ The attorney who
took the oath for the Archbishop is, they say, seized with religious
horrors at the approaching confiscation of Canterbury property, and
has in vain tendered back his 6s. 8d. for taking the oath. The
Archbishop refuses to accept it; and feeling himself light and
disencumbered, wisely keeps the saddle upon the back of the writhing
and agonized scrivener. I have talked it over with several Clergymen,
and the general opinion is, that the scrivener will suffer."

And next lie turns his attention to a foolish Bishop who has argued in a
pamphlet that, if a fund for the improvement of poor benefices was to be
created, it must be drawn from the property of the Cathedrals, because the
Bishops' incomes had already been pruned.

"This is very good Episcopal reasoning; but is it true? The Bishops
and Commissioners wanted a fund to endow small Livings; they did not
touch a farthing of their own incomes, only distributed them a little
more equally; and proceeded lustily at once to confiscate Cathedral
Property. But why was it necessary, if the fund for small Livings was
such a paramount consideration, that the future Archbishops of
Canterbury should be left with two palaces, and L15,000 per annum? Why
is every future Bishop of London to have a palace in Fulham, a house
in St. James's Square, and L10,000 a year? Could not all the Episcopal
functions be carried on well and effectually with the half of these
incomes? Is it necessary that the Archbishop of Canterbury should give
feasts to Aristocratic London; and that the domestics of the Prelacy
should stand with swords and bag-wigs round pig, and turkey, and
venison, to defend, as it were, the Orthodox gastronome from the
fierce Unitarian, the fell Baptist, and all the famished children of
Dissent? I don't object to all this; because I am sure that the method
of prizes and blanks is the best method of supporting a Church which
must be considered as very slenderly endowed, if the whole were
equally divided among the parishes; but if my opinion were
different--if I