Thomas Bowles (priest)

The Court of Arches took evidence on the case in May 1770,[7][9][11] two years after the bishop who appointed Bowles, John Egerton, had left the see of Bangor. Richard Williams and John Thomas testified that Bowles had seldom conducted services at St Beuno's, and when he did it was only in English.[12][13] Another witness, Henry Jones, testified that Bowles had conducted a service at St Beuno's no more than three times.[14] Williams and Jones testified that soon afterwards Bowles tried to minister in Welsh, but his grasp of the language was so poor that none of the congregation could understand him.[15][16] Several witnesses, including his own curate,[17] declared that when Bowles tried to minister the sacraments at Holy Communion, his Welsh was so bad that many communicants either burst out laughing or had to stifle themselves to avoid doing so.[14][15][18][19][20] Since then Bowles had but seldom attended St Beuno's, and had employed a Welsh-speaking perpetual curate, John Griffith,[21] to officiate in his stead.[15][22] Griffith testified that he never saw Bowles conduct a service at St Cwyfan's.[23]

Under cross-examination, Williams said that in October 1768 Bowles had paid a Hugh Hughes half a guinea to translate a sermon into Welsh, but that Bowles had never attempted to preach the sermon to the congregation.[24] Williams conceded that in April 1769 Bowles managed to read the Collect, Lord's Prayer, Ten Commandments, Epistle and Gospel in Welsh,[24] but said that only those parishioners who had Welsh Prayer Books were able to follow him, whereas most members of the congregation had no Prayer Book.[25] Williams also testified that Bowles had tricked both him[25] and Hugh Williams[26] into signing a deposition that Bowles had conducted a service in Welsh "with a fluent and easy delivery, and a graceful propriety of accent and pronunciation".[27] The deposition was signed also by Rev. Arthur Lewis,[27] but he was Bowles' son-in-law.[25]

The Court of Arches did not hear the prosecution and defence arguments until January 1773.[28] Defence counsel contended "that it is for the interest of the principality that the English language should prevail in that country".[29] The defence further asserted:

Wales is a conquered country, it is proper to introduce the English language, and it is the duty of bishops to endeavour to promote the English, in order to introduce the language... It has always been the policy of the legislature to introduce the English language in Wales. We never heard of an act of parliament in Welsh... The English language is, by act of parliament, to be used in all the courts of judicature in Wales; and an English Bible is to be kept in all the churches in Wales, that by comparison with the Welsh, they may the sooner attain the knowledge of the English.[7][30]

The defence argued that in order to have Bowles deprived of the living, the prosecution had to prove not just his inability and incapacity but his total inability and incapacity to minister in Welsh.[31] The prosecution argued that Bowles's inability to speak Welsh contravened not only one of the Articles of Religion and the Act for the Translation of the Scriptures, but also the Act of Uniformity 1662.[6]

The Dean of Arches, George Hay, agreed that clergy who lacked knowledge of Welsh should not be appointed to Welsh-speaking parishes.[32] However, Hay therefore concluded that clergy should be examined in Welsh before being inducted into the benefice.[32] Bowles had been lawfully inducted and instituted to the benefice, and therefore held the ecclesiastical freehold, so Hay doubted whether he had the power to deprive him of it.[32] Hay judged that Bowles's total incapacity had not been sufficiently proved, and his verdict therefore allowed Bowles to keep the living.[33] On the other hand, Hay did not award Bowles his legal costs.[9]