FEUD IN DIOCESE

Poverty Bay Herald, Volume LV, Issue 16869, 5 February 1929, Page 11

FEUD IN DIOCESE

PROCEEDINGS BY DEAN RESTRAINT PLACED ON BISHOP GRANTING OF INJUNCTION. The strained relations between Bishop Cherrington and Dean Barnett, of Hamilton, entered a new phase at an eleventh hour on Saturday, when the dean secured an in junction from His Honor Mr. Justice 'Blair, which will prevent proceeding with the commission which was to sit this week to consider allegations of untitness and disloyalty. The .motion came before the Hamilton Supreme Court, Messrs. Julius Hogben and Noel S. Johnson appearing for plaintiff, the defendants being Bishop Cherrington and tho nominees for the commission. Rev. H. R. B. Gillespie, of Okato, and Messrs. K. S. Caldwell, of Huntly, and C. R. Stead, of Waitara. The. solicitors for the defendants were not represented, the proceedings being ex: parte. Five grounds were advanced in support of plaintiffs action. It was submitted that the bishop's procedure in connection with the commission was contrary to canon law, and that the appointment of the commission was not bona tide. It was further contended that the appointment of the commission and the bishop's actions were contrary to the rules of natural justice, and that the dean was deprived of his lights. Tt was also stated that the appointment ..of the three commissioners was invalid, and that irreparable injury | would result unless the defendants were prevented from proceeding with the commission. • LETTER, TO PLAINTIFF. It was set. out that on January 17 the bishop wrote to the plaintiff as follows : "As you have not answered my request in my confidential letter of the 3rd or 4th Inst., I now- formally ask you to forward me your resignation within seven days, the resignation to take effect three* months from to-day. I have an affidavit affirming that in the presence of two people you made this statement, in all good faith: 'lf ever the bishop found that I was not the man for the job I am quite prepared to get out." " The bishop's letter 'continued: "I rely on you as a man or honor to do as I request. My reasons, among others, are : (1) That you are disloyal to myself; (2) that you apparently consider that you are within your rights in defying my episcopal authority; (3) that you are incompetent to carry on the arduous task of dean and vicar of St. Peter's parish, and that the work of the Church in this town will never progress under your ministrations." The next move detailed in the plaintiff's statement was on January 17, when Bishop Cherrington wrote in the following terms to the wardens of St. Peter's Cathedral: "As soon as you can assure me that the finances will allow of it I am ready to license a clergyman to tho conventional district in the parish of St. Peter's, such district being assigned by the charter for my confirmation at the next meeting of the Standing Committee, it being understood that such a clergyman shall work entirely independently of the vicar of St. PeterV WORK OF THE PARISH. "After recent occurrences 1 refuse to license any clergyman to work in the parish under any other conditions so long as tho Rev. G. R. Barnett remains as incumbent. I would inform you that I have, on the grounds of unsuitability and incapacity for the important work of dean of my cathedral and vicar of tlte cathedral parish, asked for Mr. Barnett's resignation. If be fails to give it me, in spite of a solemn promise made to me in writing on the eve of bis appointment, a promise of which the then vestry was made aware at the time when bis name was submitted for approval, I shall take such steps as f think fit and necessary in order that his tenure of his important office shall cease by March 31, 1929. I consider that Mr. Barnett lias been most disloyal to me and that he has broken faith, not only with myself, but also with the. people's warden of St. Peter's Cathedral, who has worked so hard to bring about such a state of things as ought to exist." On January 19 Mr. Bar.nett's solicitors replied to tho bishop to the effect that the resignation would not he ten dered. FITNESS FOR OFFICE. Plaintiff's claim set out that on January 25 a letter was received from the diocesan registrar, Mr. A. B. White, giving notice that the bishop had appointed a commission to inquire into

the dean's fitness to hold office. The nominees were Archdeacon Evans, of New Plymouth, and Messrs. E. S. Caldwell and .F. Harris, of Huntly. This letter gave the dean until noon next day to exercise the right to object to the constitution of the commission. A reply was sent by the plaintiff's solicitor objecting to the short notice, and asking the bishop's reason for holding secret meetings, and requesting the details of the charges and names of the persons whom the bishop claimed had asked for the commission. The diocesan registrar replied on January 26, extending time for the lodging of an objection until the 31st, and refusing to name the requisitionists. Dean Barnett's solicitors replied: "We should like to say that we regard tho appointment, of Archdeacon Evans as invalid, as this gentleman has preconceived views on the matter in issue, and it will be impossible to expect him to approach the inquiry with an unbiased mind. We do not suggest this in any offensive manner, but in view of the , great controversy which has existed in matters affecting the parish of St. Peter's, and thereby the diocese, and of Archdeacon Evans' public pronouncements in the press and otherwise, it is manifest that his attitude of mind would not be altered by' any evidence entered on behalf of the dean. OBJECTION TO COMMISSIONER, The letter continued: "The evidence, coming as it would in a large part from those whom the archdeacon has criticised publicly, the/irchdeacon's, and his decision sitting as a commissioner, must be in favor of the views already expressed by the bishop in correspondence and at meetings." 1 On January 30 the registrar acknowledged the plaintiff's letter, refuting the charges of bias against Archdeacon Evans, and giving the names of the requisitionists. The same day plaintiff's solicitors agaisi entered a complaint against the inclusion of Archdeacon Evans and Mr. Harris, and informed tho registrar that th>B right to prevent the sitting of the commission by injunction was reserved. The personnel of the commission was then changed, the registrar advising Dean Barnett last Thursday, January 31, that the members would be the Rev. Mr. Gillespie and Messrs. Caldwell and Stead. The affidavit by Dean Barnett placed before the Judge by Mr. Hogben contained the following*: "Since July, 1928, defendant has by his actions and words shown himself to be personally hostile to me and has on several occasions asked me or hinted that I should resign. Towards the end of August, 1928, defendant asked me to resign, and on my refusing stated to me that if I refused to go there were ways of getting rid even of a dean." His Honor granted an injunction pending the trial of action or a further order of the court preventing the bishop from setting up the commission and the commissioners from acting in any way as a commission.