The Dorset County Express and Agricultural Gazette.
Dorchester, Dorset, England, 1862-02-11 00:00:00

litgal.

Another great battle will be fought in the Court of
Arches on the question of the orthodoxy ef the Rev.
Henry Bristow Wilson, BD. On Tuesday an intima-
tion was conveyed to the proctors of the Rev. James
Fendal, at whose instance this suit in the matter of
" Essays and Reviews" is promoted, that the articles
flied against Mr. Wilson would be opposed on their ad-
mission. The chief doctrines the essayist and reviewer
is accused of opposing are the common origin of men as
descendants from Adam and Eve, original sin and the
penalties attaching to disobedience, the inearnation of
Our Lord, the fact of a serpent tempter, the fact of
Balsam's am speaking with man's voice, the arrest of the
earth's motion, of waters standing in a solid heap, appa-
ritions, &a, the personality of Satan, the corporeal
taking up of Elijah, the universality of the deluge, the
confusion of tongues, the nature of angels, and the
reality of demoniacal possession.
A novel scene took place a short time since in the
Court of Exchequer. The celebrated painter, Sir
Edwin Landseer was summoned by a west-end tailor for
the price of two coats, which he refrised to pay for
because neither fitted him. The plaintiff contended
that the coats, as originally made, were a beautiful fit,
and that even after Sir Edwin's whims had induced him
to make several alterations for the worse, they still
fitted reasonably well. Sir FAhrin, on the contrary,
declared that they never did fit, and he offered, as the
coats were in court, to try them on and let the jury
judge for theiuselvesi. This was acceded to; Sir Edwin
donned the garments, and, ono at the jurymen being a
tailor, left the witness-box that he might mote oriticially
examine their merits, as "typed and moulded to the
shape." His report to his brother jurymen appears to
have teen unfavourable, for they returned a verdict for
the defendant.

A BARRISTIS DISBAHERD FOR BREACH OF PRO-
FISS/ONAL ETIQUETTP.—It is announced that Mr
Claydon, a barrister, who has for some time practised in
the County Court and Petty Sessions Courts in the
town of Wolverhampton and the district, has been
disbarred in the pent few days by the benchers of
Lincoln's tnn. ?dr. Claidon hall not unfrequently taken
eases withoutthe customary instructions from attorneys
and complaints have been made of this practice to the
judge of the County Court. During the hearing of an
insolvency petition in the Wolverhampton County
Court, last July, Mr. Clayton publicly announced that
he should continue the practice unless it could be shown
that he WWI acting wrongly. The judge (Mr. A. M.
Skinner, Q.C.) said that as a benoher of Lincoln's Inn he
could not but take cogniaance of the challenge, and at
once drew up a statement of the ease, which, if we mis-
take not, he submitted to Mr. Claydon. This statement
having been forearded to the benchers they have,
after hearing evidence, decided in a manner that, it is
announced, will prevent Mr. Claydon from continuing
to practise the profession of a barrister. We understand
that Mr. Claydon has expressed his resolve to appeal
against the decision of the bencliers.—Birtainghast
Daily Post.
EICHSQUEM CHASIBERS.—THS BISHOP OF BESTIR
v. MARSHALL—This was an appeal from the decision of
the Court of Common Pleas. Thu Rev Mr. Marshall,
it appeared had been seised of the vicarage of Tregonv,
in Cornwall, that he presented himself, and was insti-
tuted, and it became vacant, lie then presented Mr.
, Read, whom the Bishop of Exeter refused to institute
on the ground that Mr. Read had not been ordained in
his diocese. Mr. Read at that time was clerk in holy
orders, and came from the diocese of Manchester, and
wholly unknown to the Bishop of Exeter. The bishop
contended that Mr. Read had not produced sufficient
letters commendatory according to the law of England;
but he brought letters commendatory from the
Bishop of Manchester, which the Bishop of
of Exeter held were not such, according to the eccle-
siastic law, and he required further letters recom-
mendatory from the Bishop of Manchester, and letters
commendatory were then presented to the Bishop, sent
byithree beneficed clergymen in favour of Mr.lßead, and
that be had not taught anything contrary to the
doctrines of the law of England ; and the Bishop
of Manchester sent a memorandum stating that he
knew of no reason why Mr. Read should not be instituted .
The material question raised was, whether the Bishop of
Exeter, who bad not ordained a clerk, had • right to
ask for letters commendatory from the Bishop of the
diocese from which the clerk came! The Court of
Common Pleas, after hearing the arguments of the
counsel, which occupied three days, decided that the
Bishop of Exeter had not that right, and gave judgment
for Mr. Marshall. The Court were of opinion that the
judgment of the Court of Common Pleas should be
affirmed. Decision affirmed accordingly.