Sir, — Will you allow me to explain through your columns the nature and purpose of the memorial on Reservation committed to my charge and recently presented to the Archbishop and Bishops of the province of Canterbury? The memorial concerned only a definite attempt which was to have been made in Convocation to deny to the faithful access to the Reserved Sacrament for purposes of devotion. . . When the time comes, if ever it does, for that rubric to be submitted to Parliament as part of a Revised Prayer Book, then those who are opposed to it will know how to act. It is not difficult to forecast the effect of such opposition to a rubric intended to restrict the rights of devout Churchmen. This restriction the Bishop of London declared, in a speech for which . . . we all must heartily thank him, to be part of a plan that had broken down and proved impossible. Meanwhile the signatories of the memorial have every reason to be satisfied that an attempt has been stopped, which would assuredly have forced a very large and increasing number of both clergy and laity to take steps in defence of their privileges. The memorial was signed by nearly 1000 priests, amongst whom are doctors of divinity, fellows of colleges, canons residentiary and honorary, prebendaries, rural deans, incumbents, assistant priests, and others holding a bishop’s licence. It is difficult to imagine that anyone can have signed it, as the Archbishop suggests, under a misapprehension, considering that the terms of the memorial are in no way ambiguous.

A. HANBURY TRACY
St Barnabas’, Pimlico.