The Express.
London, England, 1852-08-20 00:00:00

GREECE.

The Obserrateur of Athens, of the 7th, gives some
explanations as to the mission of M. Mavrocordato
to Home, to regulate the relations of the catholic
clergy in Greece with the Greek government. The
article of that journal is as follows:
The ecallenieelical laws lately voted by the Legialative
Body have ielleitively ragWgd the relations which are to
exist beams the awshissa each of the country and the
Mater** Moe arpmairedithe supreme administrative math°.
rig of the Greek char*, aad deed its attributions. It was,
emsgeestly,indispersebie that the government should think
ef esew the rights of the Greeks established abroad, who
beiges ee the orthodox search. Greece, which prefemes the
religious toleneee with regard to all recognised
Cerltaitf worship, sat particularly towards the catholic
religion, which has a sissaber of adherents spread over its
territory, where they enjoy all the eights belonging to the
orthodox Greeks, is belied to obtain for her people este-
, Milted abroad a just reelprocity for the exercise of their
religious duties. It is, therefore, the duty of the Greek
government to obtain on this subject a concordat with the
Holy See, and which will at the same time regulate the
relation of the catholic clergy in Greece with. the govern.
anent of the country.

" TRACTAILIAN SCANDAL"
70 11111 SDITOIL OF 7MII DAILY KIWI.
Sia,,—A leading article appeared in your paper of
the Stet July, ender the hied " Trestarian Scandal " re-
lating W a swim chars allablet a el•rillaiali when; you
desigineed sr a " leading Larks treetarins divine," and
whieh chugs yen iihmmi was ea the provisos day " the
sutiewbject of an isiestletise imiftituoil by episcopal direc-
."_

We bad hived that es prom who supplied the infor-
mation out whisk this aril& was hooded so speedily, as to
allow you to insist it as a lewhiagg ankle in your paper of
the day after the Inquiry onsussood, would hare seen the
justice of bobs equally promo in giving you correct in-
formation of is molt. Bat although the investigation
wee eaasisilml ea this 6th inst., he does not appear to hare
dew so, hr year earnsposdent "C. R. H.," whose letter
leserlid r your papa of the 12th instant, states kismet(
Is bast bpss . st win the =OM in your
eolossas, Ito was thorshos not the osatoihutot of the pre-
vious artists.

Under these eirrunstaness, we feel called upon, as the
professional edvieue of . the clergyman alluded to in your
article, to state to you
_the following fact.. The charge re-
lated to matte alleged to have happened so far beck as
January, 1830. Tbe accusation reached the cars of the
accused for the ant time on the 23rd July last, awl be im-
mediately insisted on as Inquiry, either publio biters) a
tribunal, lay eirecekeiastioel (as a preliminary measure), or
before private referees chosen by the accuser and himself.
The latter course was chosen by " C. R. II." on the part of
the lady, whom he states to be his connexion.
Before the ref lees were selected, the clergyman accused
thought it right that the charge and the ouune intended
to he purged should be mentioned to the bishop. Hie
lordship was so good u to suggest that a more satisfactory
mune would be that the investigation should he conducted
by the Archaueen of Middlesex ; who haying uudertaken
it, the parties with the witnesses appeared before him un July
30 and the 6th Inst. At the latter meeting, after the accuser
sod the accused bad been heard, awl before any witnesses
were examined, the legal adviser of the accuser stated to the
archdeacon that he could not sustain the charge. On the
part of the seemed it was not thought enough that the
charge should break 110W13, and therefore the witnesses
were called to disprove it. We have now the permission of
the Lord Bishop of London for stating that the archdeacon
has reported to his lordship that " he considers the charge
not meetly to be nut substantiated, but to be satisfactorily
disproved."
These are shortly the facts so far as the investigation is
concerned. Upon these we do not desire to make any ob-
servation ; and only one on the " moral" which "C. It. H."
has drawn from the charge. That gentleman was not pre-
sent, sari did not hear the evideuce given ; and we regret
that he did not, before writing his letter to you, apply to
the gentlemen who acted professionally on the part et the
sceuser by whom a note of the evidence wan taken ; fur,
had he done so, he would have known that it was distinctly
proved before the nrch,leacon that neither confession nor
the euntenional (the alleged abuse of whirl, are evidently
the point both of your article and of his mural) had any
existence in the case, except in the mind of the lady who
made the charge.
We trust to your sense ofjustice to give to ibis letter as
prominent a place, and that in as large a type, in an early
aumber of your paper, es that which you gave to the notice
of the charge in your paper of the 31st alt.— We are, &c.,
SMART, BULLEIt, and SMART.
6e, Lincoln's-inn-fields, Aug. IV.