Rev Dr Richard Child Willis vs the Bishop of Oxford

It appears that in 1876, Richard Child Willis was presented to the living of Drayton Parslow in Buckinghamshire. The Bishop of Oxford was having none of it:

PROCEEDINGS AGAINST THE BISHOP OF OXFORD. At the House of Lords yesterday, before Lord Penzance, as Dean of Arches, an application was made for a monition against the Bishop of Oxford to show cause why he refused to admit the Rev. Richard Child Willis, D.D. to the rectory and parish church of Drayton Parslow, Buckinghamshire, in the diocese of Oxford, rendered vacant by the death of the Rev. Benjamin Spurrell, the late Incumbent, he the applicant, having been duly presented to the rectory by Sarah Spurrell, she being entitled to present a duly qualified spiritual person. He was now vicar of Minster Sheppy, in Kent.— Dr. Tristram appeared for Dr. Willis, and read his affidavit in support of the application. At present he had only to satisfy the court that Dr. Willis was a priest of the Church of England, and had been presented, and had been refused admission. The learned counsel read that portion of the affidavit. He said on the 5th instant the Bishop had refused to admit Dr. Willis, and had given a reason which it was not necessary now to mention, as it would appear on the pleadings. He had to ask his lordship to decree a monition on the Bishop of Oxford.— The Dean of Arches granted the application. London Standard, Tuesday 13 June 1876

DRAYTON PARSLOW. The Vicarage.—In the Court of Arches, before Lord Penzance, the action brought by the Rev. Dr. Willis v. the Bishop of Oxford has been heard. It was proceeding in the nature of duplex querela, as the Bishop of Oxford had refused to institute the Rev. Dr. Willis, on the ground of a lack of knowledge. Dr. Willis was upwards of seventy, and had held preferment in the Church of England for number of years. He was refused institution, and brought his suit to which the Bishop had filed a responsive plea, and its admission was now discussed. Dr. Tristram, on the part of Dr. Willis, submitted that the plea was not sufficiently explicit as to the ground on which the Bishop had refused to institute the doctor, who had taken a degree at Oxford. Dr. Swabey, for the Bishop of Oxford, contended that the Bishop was the sole judge in the matter, if the Court saw no reason to doubt that the examination had been conducted in a bona fide manner. Lord Penzance asked if there was any case on the point. On questions of heresy a matter could be decided by the Court, but there was no standard as to knowledge. Dr. Tristram said there was no case, and the fact of candidate having taken a degree was sufficient as to his knowledge. His lordship observed that the point was of importance, and he would take time to consider his judgment. Bucks Herald, Saturday 18 November 1876

Lord Penzance has decided that a bishop is not entitled to say a clergyman is not learned enough to be instituted to a living to which has been presented, without giving particulars of such alleged deficiency. The Bishop of Oxford is, therefore, called upon to state with particularity what objection he has to the learning of the Rev. Dr. Willis, who, having been vicar of Minster, in the Isle of Sheppey, about thirty years, has recently been presented to the living of Drayton Parslow, in Buckinghamshire. North Devon Journal, Thursday 07 December 1876

Insufficient Learning In the Church.— In the case of Willis v. Bishop of Oxford, Lord Penzance, in the Court of Arches on Saturday morning, gave judgment upon the point whether the responsive plea of the Bishop should be admitted. The promoter complained that, having been duly presented to the Rectory of Drayton Parslow, in the Diocese of Oxford, the Bishop refused to institute him. The answer of the Bishop was that he deputed the Ven. Archdeacon Pott, one of his chaplains, to examine Dr. Willis to ascertain whether he was worthy of the office, and the result of the examination satisfied the Bishop that the promoter was non idoneus et minus sufficiens in literatura.The promoter argued that the Bishop was bound to go further, and say in what respect he fell short of the educational requirement which was described as sufficiens in literatura; while the Bishop claimed that his judgment was final, and not subject to review by the Court of Arches. The learned judge quoted from the case of Marshall v. the Bishop of Exeter, and Gorham against the same. The former affected the question of patrons' rights, and in the judgment in the House of Lords Lord Westbury said the rule contended for by the Bishop would open the door to very arbitrary and suspicious proceedings, and was at variance with reason, and judgment was given against the Bishop. The second case was the only one reported which was like the present one and that established the authority of this Court. He decided, therefore, that the Bishop was bound to state in his plea in what respect the clerk was minus sufficiens in literatura, and to state it with such particularity as would enable the Court, assuming the facts, to decide on the validity of the objections taken to the clerk. Whatever standard of learning the Bishop set up, to which he thought the clerk's ability should come, the Bishop ought to state it in terms sufficiently broad for the Court to consider and decide whether such standard was required by law as a condition precedent to clerk's institution. The Bishop's plea must, therefore, be amended, and the costs of this application ought to be costs in the case. Exeter and Plymouth Gazette, Friday 08 December 1876

DRAYTON PARSLOW. The Rectory. - The following communication has been addressed to us by Mr. John Newton, of Leighton Buzzard, together with the extract appended: "As the late Rev. Dr. Willis was presented to this living through my introduction to the patroness, and by my request, and the Bishop of Oxford refused to institute him on the ground that he was not worthy of his ministry, being minus sufficiens literis, I beg to forward extract from the Sheerness Guardian of the 10th instant, in order that your readers may know in what estimation he was held by his late parishioners at Minster.- 'With many regrets it is our duty to chronicle the death of the Rev. Dr. Willis, which took place at the Vicarage, Minster, Sheppey, after a short illness, on the 27th ultimo. Dr. Willis was born at Petworth, Sussex, on the 4th of March, 1799, and was the third and only surviving son of the late Rear-Admiral Richard Willis, formerly Port Admiral at Portsmouth, and grandson to Dr. Francis Willis, an English physician of eminence, distinguished for his skill in the treatment of the insane, who was physician to King George the Third, and afterwards had care of the Queen of Portugal. The subject of this notice, the late Rev. Dr. Willis, was in his seventy-eighth year, and was a very remarkable man for his age - energetic, courteous, and accomplished - a good type of the English gentleman and scholar. In youth he became gentleman commoner of the University College, Oxford, and at his thirteenth term he took first class in classics. Somewhere about 1834 he was ordained. But what we more particularly know is that during these last ten years the Rev. Dr. Willis has been vicar of Minster, and well known for his able ministry and preaching. That he was beloved by all who knew him, and by his parishioners, and generally respected, we can testify; assiduous in his duties, his Church was never neglected, and he won the favourable opinion of all classes. To the poor he was ever considerate and kind, and was most respectfully treated by the Archbishop of his diocese (Canterbury). His urbanity, his eloquence as a preacher, and his finished elocution as a reader, drew numbers of people to hear him. Sunday after Sunday many persons from Sheerness wended their way to Minster for the express purpose of listening to the excellent and scholarly discourses of the venerable doctor. In summer the people literally flocked to hear him, so universal was his fame. We sincerely believe that he always lived as he has died, "in peace and harmony with all men," his dying words. It is thought that the worry caused by the litigation brought about by the Bishop of Oxford had a very depressing effect on Dr. Willis, and on the whole hastened his death. Sic itur ad astra.' Bucks Herald, Saturday 17 February 1877

This episode inspired some contemporary doggerel:

Aid me, Muses! my endeavour is to sing a woful song,
How a very learned bishop in the Arches Court went wrong.
Aid me, for duplex querela is an uninviting theme,
And the practice of the Arches raises no poetic dream.
'Tis the Reverend Child Willis, child in name but not in age,
Comes he to the Court of Arches burning with a noble rage,
Filing his duplex querela, claiming for himself thereby
Vicarage of Drayton Parslow, or to know the reason why.
"Reason why?" the bishop answers; "that is not so far to seek.
Little Latin have you, Willis, innocent are you of Greek.
You were specially examined by my good Archdeacon Pott;
He reported to me promptly, 'Greek and Latin all forgot,
Non idoneus is Willis, minus et sufficiens,
He may have a sanum corpus, but he lacks a sana mens.'"
"Nay," says Willis, "such an answer is but trifling with the court,
I have preached a Latin sermon, and the classics are my forte,
You must name the books I failed in, you must give me every chance
Of a fresh examination at the hands of Lord Penzance."
Lord Penzance supported Willis: "Bishop, you must file," said he,
"Some more tangible objection, some less vague and general plea.
As it stands I cannot gather what it is you ploughed him in,
Whether Hellenistic aorists or the Latin word for sin."
But alas! the world has never known as yet what Willis did,
In the breast of the Archdeacon still it lies a secret hid.
Was his Latin prose defective? Did his style of writing show
More resemblance to Tertullian than to Tullius Cicero?
Were his dates a little shaky? Could it, could it be that he
Confidently made Augustine flourish at a date B.C.?
None will know save Pott, Archdeacon, for alas! the patroness
Showed no mercy to Child Willis in the day of his distress.
She revoked the presentation, leaving Willis in the lurch,
One of undisputed learning preached in Drayton Parslow church.
Doubly barren was his triumph, it was not a twelve-month ere
Death set up his Court of Arches, Willis did not triumph there.

From Briefless Ballads and Legal Lyrics by James Williams, 1895