"spurious liberality;" while he
declares that the Act 3 and 4 Victoria, chapter 78 (which only carried
partially into effect the decision of the twelve judges, and was, as he
states, agreed to by the Archbishop of Canterbury and the other Bishops
in London), "deprived the Church of England in Canada of seven-twelfths
of her property."

In other documents the Bishop has designated this Act "an act of
spoliation," and "robbery" of the Church of England.

When the Bishop employs language of this kind in respect to Acts of
Parliament and the official opinions in regard to their provisions, he
cannot reasonably complain if other parties should respect them as
little as himself, much less regard them as a "final settlement" of a
question to which they have not been parties, and against which they
have always protested. Under any circumstances, it is singular language
to be employed by a person towards a government by whose fostering
patronage he has become enriched. The fact is, that the successive
Governors of Upper Canada have been members of the Church of England;
that the principal cause of their unpopularity, and the most serious
difficulties which both the Imperial and local governments have had to
encounter in the colony, have arisen from their efforts to secure as
much for the Church of England, in the face of the popular indignation
and opposition, so much inflamed and strengthened by the irritating
publications and extreme proceedings of the Bishop himself. It is
understood that the report of the committee of the House of Commons on
the civil government of Canada, in 1828, was written by Lord Stanley.
However that may be, the sentiments of that report on the clergy reserve
question were strongly expressed by his Lordship in his speech on the
subject, 2nd May, 1828; and he and the other distinguished men who
investigated the subject at that time, know whether they were
"influenced by a spurious liberality" in the conclusion at which they
arrived, or whether they were guided by a sense of justice, and yielded
to the weight of testimony. At all events, the grave decision of the
twelve judges of England to the same effect ought to have suggested to
the Bishop other terms than those of "spurious liberality,"
"spoliation," and "robbery," and to have protected not only the "powers
that be," but the great majority of the Canadian people, from the shafts
of his harsh imputations.

Here I think it proper to correct the Bis