The Press.
London, England, 1855-12-08 00:00:00

THE PRESS.

that a preference, if any, will be given to the General
Screw SWAM Shipping Company.
THE Two BANKS OF RANSOM AND BOUVERIE, acting
upon the recent suggestion that a combination of the
smaller establishments would be advantageous both
for themselves and the public, have resolved upon an
amalgamation, and the business of the two houses
will, on and after the Ist of next month, be
conducted under the address of Ransom, Bouverie,
and Co.

i;atu an Volitz.

THE GREAT KNIGHTSBRIDGE AND PIMLICO CHURCH
CASE, in which " Westerton v. Liddell," and " Beal
v. Liddell and others," were the leading parties con
cerned, was decided by Dr. Lushington, at the Con-
sistory Court, on Wednesday last. The arguments of
this case, it will be remembered, were heard first on
the 17th of January, and secondly on the four days
of July last, frt,m the 24th to the 27th. Both suits
of Mr. Westerton and Mr. Beal, churchwardens of
St. Paul's, Knightsbridge, and St. Barnabas, Pimlico,
had the same object—viz., the removal of the altar
and credence-tables, with their crosses, candlesticks,
and several coloured coverings, and the provision of
a plai.i altar and comtnunion.table, as directed by the
82nd canon. Dr. Lushington argued this question
at considerable length and with profound ability,
clearly pointing out the distinction between what
was ornament and what was not ornament in church
furniture. The learned judge, quoting the case of
"Faulkner v. Litchfield," decided that stone altars
and tables were illegal, and that although with re-
gard to candlesticks and crosses upon the altar there
was considerable difficulty in satisfactorily finding a
solution of the question of the legal ornaments of a
church, yet that the statute of 2nd Edward VI., and
the statute of uniformity, could not be effected by
non usuage, that what was not permitted was pro-
hibited, and that clearly the great object of the
Reformation was not only to remove errors of
doctrine, but such usages and practices as were
judged auxiliary by their abuse to superstition and
the maintenance of error :
The conclusion (continued the learned judge) I draw
from these premises are, that I ought not to hold any
practices to be illegal merely because they are in use in
the Church of Rome; but I ought to consider every prac-
tice illegal shich was either expressly forbidden, or by
implication clearly disapproved of, at the time of the Re-
formation, and which has not been avowedly in use since
that period. But is the wisdom of men so improved that
we can venture upon any departure either from the
doctrines or practices of our ancestors with impunity?
Have we not, even in our own day, witnessed a sad example
of the danger of endeavouring anew to reform that which
our reformers left us, and assimilate our system to the
Church of Rome? Have we not seen, what never has
before, from the days of Cranmer, been seen in this land,—
not less, in a very few years, than one hundred clergymen
of our Church secede to Rome, and who were, many of
them, men of undoubted piety, of great learning, and
blameless lives ? See the monuments erected to the
memory of the martyrs of our own Church at Oxford ; and
read the names of those who took a leading part in that
work. How many have seceded from that Church which
they sought to preserve by honouring the memory of its
first restorers and martyrs ? Ought we not then to pause,
—to doubt our own strength and our own judgment—
when we seek to mend that which they bequeathed to us,
consecrated by their own blood ? Ought we not to hesitate
before we admit any one practice, any one thing, not sanc-
tioned by them, and more especially any one thing which
has the remotest leaning to the Church of Rome and her
usages, which our reformed faith holds in just abhorrence ?
Is it not wiser to keep on the safe side—to omit rather that
which may be innocent in itself, even decorous or otna-
mental—than run the remotest risk of consequences so
much to be deplored? We must bear in mind, too, that
all these matters ought to be kept wholly distinct from
questions of doctrine.
Upon those points, also, relating to the question
of candles and candlesticks upon the altar, Dr. Lush-
ington declared the following judgment:—
First —I hold that all lighted candles on the communion-
table are, from the premises 1 have already stated, contrary
to law, except when they are lightel for the purpose of
giving necessary light; but the exception must be confined
to the necessity, and the use of lighted candles on the com-
munion-table limited to that necessity, when it arises from
the defic envy of the requisite light from natural causes,
and, it may be, the peculiar structure of the edifice.
Secondly,—As to the candlesticks and candles unlighted
on or near the communion-table, I acknowledge I have
much more doubt. I have none, indeed, that the use of
costly massive candlesticks, with enormous candles, is a
remnant of popish practices, connected originally with
popish associations; but on such merely my own opinion
Ido not feel at liberty to act. If they are to be considered
ai ornaments merely, I should hold their use not to be re-
concileable with law. But I cannot deny that it is lawful
to have such articles on the communion-table, or near it,
fur necessary purposes; and therefore I cannot say, though
I 'behove that 'such necessity arises very seldom indeed,

SATURDAY,

that it is contrary to law to have them so placed ready for
use should occasion require.
• - •

- - -
With respect to the coverings of the communion.
table, Dr. .Lushington decided in both cases that the
practice of using cloths of many colours, decorated
and embroidered, "was not justified by the statute,
the rubric, or the canon," and concluded his judgment
with the following decree
As to St. Paul's, that a faculty do issue to the incumbent
and both the churchwardens to remove the credence-table
and the cross on or near to the communion•table ; to take
away all cloths at present used in the church for covering
tha communion-table during Divine service, and to substi-
tute one only covering for such purpose of silk or other
decent stuff. With respect to St. Barnabas, that a moni-
tion do issue to the churchwardens to remove the present
structure of stone used as a communion table, and to sub-
stitute therefore a moveable table of wood. To remove the
credence-table. To remove the cross on the chancel screen,
and that on or near the present structure used as a com-
munion-table. To take away all the cloths at present used
in the church for covering the structure used as a commu-
nion-table during Divine service, and to substitute only one
covering for such purpose, of silk or other decent stuff;
and further, to remove any cover used at the time of the
ministration of the Sacrament, worked or embroidered with
lace or otherwise ornamented, and to substitute a fair white
linen cloth, without lace or embroidery or other ornament,
to cover the communion-table at the time of the nnuistra-
non of the Sacrament, and to cause the Ten Command.
ments to be set up on the east end of the church in com-
pliance with toe terms of the canon.
A DISTRESSING CASE of the sufferings to which the
wives and children of labourer4 engaged by Go-
vernment in the Crimea are subject to, came before
Mr. Elliott at Lambeth on Wednesday. Ann Phinn,
with a child of five months' old in her arms, made the

following statement
In the month of December, last year, her husband, who
was a labourer, had engaged with Messrs. Peto, Brassey,
and Betts to go out to the Crimea, and permission was
given to her, with a free passage, to accompany him.
Before leaving they had placed their three children, the
one eight, the other six, and the third three years of age,
with her father and mother at East Barnet, and, they being
but poor working people, her husband had arranged that
fourteen shillings a week from his pay should be allowed
them for their support. On the 14th of February they
landed at Balaklava, and on the 12th of June she (the
applicant) was confined of the infant she had in her
arms ; on the 2Sth of the same month her husband
was seized with a violent attack of cholera, and in ten
hours was dead and buried. The loss of her husband in
her then weak state brought a fit of illness on herself, so
that she was obliged to be' taken to a hospital, and there
remained for some time. When she recovered she was
unable to take the situation of nurse, or, in fact, undertake
any other duty on account of her infant ; and, having been
offered a free passage home, she accepted the offer, sailed
from Balaklava on the 18th of August, and arrived in Eng-
land on the 16th of September lasi. Since her arrival she
had applied at the office of Messrs. Peto and Co., in
Chelsea, to ascertain if she could get anything in the way of
a pension or gratuity for herself and her four fatherless
children, and was told that nothing had as yet been decided
on, but as soon as any arrangement was come to Mr.
Woodman, one of the gentlemen in the office, would write
to her. She next applied for assistance to tike board of
guardians for East Bernet, and was told by those gentlemen
that all they could do was to afford temporary relief and
pass her to Lambeth parish, which was that in which her
husband had gained a settlement. Not wishing to undergo
the ordeal of passing, and thinking that if the parish of
L .mbeth only allowed her a trifle for her children she
might manage to struggle on with her parents at East
Barnet, she made up her mind to see the officers of Lam-
beth parish, and came to town for the purpose. On that
day she saw Mr. Cope, one of the relieving-officers, to
whom she made her statement, and he told her that she
I ad no settlement in Lambeth, as she had not acquired one
through her husband, and that her maiden pariah was that
to which she was legally chargeable. He, however, added
that he had no objection to take her and her children into
the workhouse until such time as he could make out the
place of her legal settlement, and should then pass them
in the regular way to it.
The poor woman, who was deeply affected, said her
repugnance to go into a workhouse was so great, that
she would rather wear her nails to the quick than go
there, and that a much less sum than that which it
would cost to keep her in the workhouse would
enable her to maintain herself and children in the
country. Mr. Elliott, who observed tha he could
compel the parish officers to do nothing but
admit her to the workhouse, gave her five shillings
from the poor-box, and the applicant left tie court.
A CASE OF BRUTAL ILL TREATMENT of a wife was
brought before Mr. Hammill, at Worship-street, on
Tuesday last. It appeared from the evidence of the
wife that her husband, James Elliott, a bricklayer,
of Spitalfields, had for the last seven years been in
the habit of cruelly ill-treating her, and that on one
previous occasion she had been in hospital for seven
weeks from the defendant having cut her head open
with a stick :
On Monday morning last she arose between three and
four o'clock to prepare her husband's breakfast before he
went to work ; but he suddenly jumped up, and, placing a
large box against the door to barricade it, struck her a
violent blow at the back of her neck, which he cut, swear-
ing that he would " cut her throat from ear to ear;" and
she believed that be must have had a knife in his hand

DECEMBER 8, 1855.

when he struck her. He then made her put on his shoes,
his coat, Sze., which, she said, she did as well as she could,
feeling very feint and much frightened.
In reply to a question from Mr. Hammill, the corn
plainant stated that although her husband had been
four times before the court for ill-treatment of her,
yet she had trusted to his promises of amendment
and never appeared against him. The defendant
was then committed to six months' hard labour by
Mr. Hammill, and required also to find bail for six
months further good behaviour.
MR. BATES, THE CONVICT B.A7MILZR, is about to
petition her Majesty, by memorial, praying for a
pardon, on the ground that though nominally a
partner, he was de facto but head clerk, and to a
great extent ignorant of the frauds carried on by
Strahan and Paul. In the case of Dr. Griffith, Mr.
Bates asserts that he was entirely ignorant of, and
in uo way privy to, the sale of that rev. gentleman's
bonds, and although he was ultimately informed of
the transaction, and remained a member of the firm,
yet that he did so from a desire to avoid hastening
the fate of the house while yet a chance remained to
them of retrieving their position.
ALICE GREY, THE WOLVERHAMPTON IMPOSTOR,
whose trial was anticipated at the Stafford Assizes,
on Monday, to the surprise of every one, was ordered
to be set at liberty by Mr. Justice Williams, the
grand jury having thrown, out the bill. The learned
judge himself expressed his astonishment at the bill
of indictment being thrown out by the jury, but ad-
mitted that under the circumstances he saw no
reason to detain the prisoner. This conclusion was
intimated to the prisoner, who, on being informed
that she might remain in the gaol for the night,
-accepted the offer. On the succeeding morning,
before she had left the prison, the Superintendent of
the Birmingham Police having received intelligence
of the fact, proceeded at once to Stafford, and ob-
tained a warrant from a magistrate, and arresting the
fair prisoner on a charge of perjury, carried her off
to Birmingham for trial.
THE INQUEST ON THE BODY OF MR. STERLING was
resumed on Tuesday last at Newcastle, and ad-
journed for want of further evidence until Wednes-
day fortnight. The two men arrested on what at
first appeared strong circumstantial evidence, will
probably be shortly liberated, a good case of alibi being
sustained by the prisoners.
THE CASE OF MARTINSON, THE BANK CASHIER,
who embezzled 4,2641., and was lately arrested on
board the New York steamer at Southampton at the
moment of starting, was tried at Newcastle before
Mr. Baron Martin on Tuesday last. An attempt
was made to exculpate the prisoner on the plea that
the guarantees had, together with the prisoner's own
property, made up the entire loss to the bank. Mr.
Justice Martin observed that the plea was no mitiga-
tion of the offence, and that the greater the trust
broken the greater should be the punishment. The
learned judge then sentenced the prisoner to fourteen
years' transportation.
THE TRIAL OF THE MAFTEN MURDERERS, which
was expected to take place at the present Northern
Assizes, was postponed on Monday, by Mr. Justice
Willes, as the matter was still under the investigation
of the magistrates.

Sir,—ln my last I maintained it to he historically
proved that great wars, once fairly begun, quickly
get beyond the control of human reason or foresight,
and pursue an irresistible course which statesmen
are unable to arrest. I proceed now to show that
this is not, as you say, a mere "pagan fatality," but
what might naturally be expected as the legitimate
consequence of war.
1. The very fact of war implies that the bellige-
rents have previously tried all other methods of ad-
justing their differences, and, in particular, that
they have found reason altogether insufficient for the
purpose, and that they have, therefore, elected to do
without it. and to put the issue on the chance of
battle. It follows that the same irreconcilable
discrepancy of opinion which has brought them into
this position will prevent them agreeing to peace, the
more especially as the evil passions which a state of
war evokes will have embittered their previous mis-
understanding. So that so long as the belligerents
remain each the judge of his own case, there seems
no terminus to the conflict till one or both are ex-
hausted.
2. But it might be expected that the influence
and power of neutral nations would bring about an
accommodation—and this, indeed, often happens, am'
is in itself an instance of the control of the contest
being taken out of the hands of the combatants—
but it only happens when the neutral States are
sufficiently strong to compel the combatants to adopt
their award, and in most instances of the kind actual
compulsion has been resorted to. Bnt where the
belligerent nations, as in the present case, are so
powerful that neutrals cannot interfere by compul-
sion, interference in any other way is of little avail in
bringing about an accommodation. The reason of
this is simple, and explains the cause why such
attempts, however well meant, prove abortive.