The Express.
London, England, 1864-05-02 00:00:00

FIELD'S celebrated UNITED SERVICE SOAP ,
TABLETS, ed. end ed. each, sold by PU chandlers and
purer, throughout the kingdom bat the public should sok ,
or Fields, and see that the name of J. C. and J. FIELD la
on each packet, box, and tablet. Wholesale and for exportation
at the Works, UPPER MARSH, LAMBETH, LONDON, S., where
also may be obtained their Prise Medal Pusan* Candles.

"IN what Happy Land can I see you after the
-m. ..Operar I *sly tan• of etke "Happy Lead" in which a
gentlemaa asay sap—SVlLlfdle. Coyest-gm:dm ley dear fellow I

gat Orpreoo.

TO CRILZMIPONDINIS.

Avalbmosiale 23611 q;;;;" Lauda Zweig
Paw, art le ali ease. Boaverio44nK Two
Woo& ea all dog at yUirYaa

BAYMA lULIT.

Till EMITINS, Alf UNLUCKY iiORTAL. Mtn Banta.—
DAVID GAR.IIO.C. Messrs. Both , Backstops. Clappendsle,
es.istose Moors,& Fi wads°, tzwillism.—And VYNUtt
trA IiDONI.S. terra Caeopto.. Parrett . Mal K•akty.

PLINCWIL

Tern Emission, DRAIVIIiO7OOII7 RICOND FLOOR, AND
ATTIC& Mr. D. Asher and MW 11. Howard. —And ROMA/
AIL JULIET. Messrs. Nelsen aid Vidal; YdIL. Blahs
COllllll and Mrs. IL Manion.

LYCEML.

TEM Emonno. A DAY Vail THE TAM Mr.Wlddional
sad Mks E. Lyman—And PLAYING WITH PULL Hamm.
Brougham, Imary, Iddlecento, and Shore lillem Carlota
Leckrco, Elearade, P. Leelercg. and Lra. Wleatanky.

SiITAII/1 lA.

THIS 'Vim TEE LIFT-RAIIIIED MARRIAGE. 10s. &
Lane and all the Company.—THE GREAT GHOST EFFECT.
—DEBO.LEAR Master Percy tesalle and Hires C. 84. Came
and rcott.—And • grand SHAH MILIAN TABLEAUX.

RION WATER AT LONDON MUDD%
Ilas DAT Wargo& 101. •Gm.... ..2116w0ra. 116. 20a
Coßwitow Mamba 111. 60a ....Afterawa Oh. Ow

LONDON, MONDAY, MAY 2.

THEILE are surer advocates, it seems, in the
world than the moat zealous Protestant orators
of the House of Commons. Mr. SILLS had a
brother-in-law of some fortune who became
converted to Roman Catholicism, and who,
consequently, instead of leaving his money to his
relations, lett it to the Oratory at Brampton.
During his life Father Hirratizos, the brother of
Mrs. SHE; spent about 7,0001. in his religious
fancies, so that at his death his assets did not ex-
ceed 5,0001. But it seems that 5,0001. is
a sum large enough to induce a zealous Protestant
not only to write eloquent letters, but to get up a
debate in the House of Commons, and to run the
risk of losing a considerable sum as costs in the
attempt to dispute the validity of an indisputable
testament. If any illustration were needed of the
impropriety of discussing a matter about to be
brought before a court of justice, the case of Father
licrceisoN's will, which was concluded on Satur-
day before Sir JAMES WILD; supplies it. It
was only a few days ago that Mr. Newt:mown used
the case of Father HUTCHISON'S will as a conclusive
argument to prove the necessity of an inquiry into
conventual establishments in this country.
As the case was presented to the Court it was
simply impossible that Sir JAMES WILDE could
come to any other conclusion than that the will
of Father Hurcrusox was valid. It is true that
Mr. Hl:rvuisox had been a Protestant, that Mrs.
Smith was his sister, and that be had other rela-
tives. But be was a man of stroug religious feel-
ings—he had, against the earnest remonstrances
of his friends, abandoned the religion in which
he had been educated, had sacrificed his
health, and devoted his life to the cause of the
Roman church. He had not only spent a large
part of his fortune upon the religious institution
of which he was a member, but he bad laboured
so ardently among the poor that he was com-1
pelted to abandon his duties for a time and to seek
renewed health and strength by travel in the
East. Li it surprising that a man so earnestly
bent upon the propagation of his religious views
should leave the whole of his fortune for the same
purpose ? It is true that he had a sister and a
brother-in-law, but it would be a gross worldly fal-
lacy to pretend to think that such relations were to
be weighed in the balance against those of his
church. Indeed the singular thing would have
been if Father HUTCHISON had died without at-
testing the sincerity of his belief by the manner
in which he disposed of his property. His con-
duct was consisteut to the last.

From the year 1855, which was the date of
Father 111:TCHI.ON.8 first will, until 1861, which
was the date of his last will and codicil, there was
no variation in his intentions. In one or another
form he bequeathed all his property to the religious
community with which he was connected—the,
Oratory at Brompton. It is not pretended that any
sign of mental disease began until after the year
1855, and yet it is to be observed that in the year
1855 a will was made by Father Huremeow
by which his family was excluded from all
share in his propetty. At that period he had
been a convert for ten years, and his teltamentary
dispositions cannot be explained by the enthusiasm
of a proselyte. What was rational in 1855 must
have been rational in 1861. And if Father HUT-
CHISON'S will is to be set aside, it must be set aside
by evidence as to the mental imbecility of the
testator. Of this, however, there was scarcely a
tittle.

Dr. DEANE insisted that in the year 1858 there
was a general paralysis of one side of Father Hue-
CHISON'S body, and that his capacity having been
blunted by paralysis, he had been overcome by re-
ligious influence. It is well established that if a
man is in such a condition—if he is so feeble and
incapable—that he cannot exert his own free will,
but is, as it were, the mere mouthpiece of some
spiritual adviser, any document drawn up
and executed under such circumstances
will be set aside as obtained under undue influence.
A last will must be the kat will of the testator
himself, not of his confessor, of his clergyman, or
of his confidential doctor. What evidence was
there that the last will and codicil of Father
Hrrcnnsos: were extorted from him ? They were
identical in effect with the wills he had made six
years previous. Moreover, the testator's history
was elaborately traced between the years 1857 and
1863, when he died. Protestant gentlemen who
bad travelled with him—Protestant doctors who
had attended him—Protestant gentlemen who had
visited, conversed with him, and corresponded
with him—were all produced as witnesses, some
of them by Mr. SMEE himself, but not one
ventured to say that, paralysed as his body was,
his mind was at all impaired. On the
very day on which the disputed will
was executed Mr. &sea seems to have
written a letter to his brother-in-law, HUTCHISON,
in which he says :—" Until I saw your hand-
" writing I had not the slightest idea that you
" had soy serious ailment." And up to the very
moment of his death he employed himself in cor-
recting the proof sheets of a volume upon which he
was engaged. Here, if anywheiJ, ought to have
been found proofs of the feebleness of the testator's
mind. It treated of a subject upon which the
testator's mind was peculiarly sensitive—it was
composed during the veil time when the paralytic
disease of which he ultimately died had become
seriously developed. But the book betrayed no
traces of imbecility ; on the contrail, Sir Jsmas
Witoe said that ho had read the book, and
" although it showed a man of strong religious
" faith, it yes a work which no one could pos-
" sibly have written except he was of sound