The Express.
London, England, 1862-06-25 00:00:00

that was not in his judgment any violation of the articles of
religion. He had not said that the Book of Daniel had
no authority binding upon the church, and the court
must reject this article also. In mitering upon
tho consideration of the 10th article, he wished to observe
that here as in other cases many of the charges made were
founded upon an erroneous assumption as to the power,
authority, and duty of the court, and that, without regard ;
to the doctrines and formularies of the church, if any
doa•trine accustomed to be received by the highest &tithed-
ties in the church wan contravened, it would be within the
duty of the court to take cognisance of it. This was a court
of law, and not • court of divinity, and it was bound to
confine its consideration to the articles and formularies. He
found no authority for saying that the opinion that part of
the Scriptures was post-Apostolic amounted to a denial that
it was canonical ; but that was • question of divi-
nity with which the court had nothing to do, and
he could not, therefore, pronounce an opinion upon Dr.
iCillisms's teaching sal to the Epistle to gthe Hebrews.
Dr. Williams clearly denied the genuineness of the
Second Epistle of Peter, but if the court were to condemn
on that statement he must hold that to deny the book to
be genuine necessarily implied a denial of its canonicity,
and did not mean exclusively • denial of the particular au-
thorship. The one was an offence, the other was not ; and
it was difficult, from the way in which Dr. Williams ex-
pressed himself, to find what his real meaning was. There
WSJ clearly a doubt upon the subject ; and upon the
whole, the court was of opinion that this article
was not substantially a breach of ecclesiastical
law, and rejected itlaccordiogly. The fault found under the
11th article was that the opinion entertainedby Dr. Williams
that the Scripturesmight be oonstruedin • figurative and non-
natural WNW, was contrary to the articles°, religion. Assuming
that Dr. Williams had in this respect said all that he was
charged with saying, where was the court to find in
the 6th or 7th articles of religion any words op.
posed to such an interpretation of the Scriptures? What
Dr. Williams bad written might be wholly irrecon-
cilable with that which was generally received is
the orthodox tenets of religion, but there was nothing in
it contraryto the oth and 7th articles of religion, and he wail
under the necessity of rejecting this article also. The next
article the court would admit as far as the question of pro-
pitiation was concerned, but it must reject the second peril
because there was fair ground to believe that Dr. Williams
was speaking, in the passage quoted, of the doctrines
of the Roman catholic religion, and not of his own.
The fourteenth article, in which it was alleged that the
passage quoted in reference to the incarnation denied that'
the Son of God took upon himself man's nature, and that
the second article of religion was thereby contravened, was
open to grave objection, and could not be admitted, inasmuch
as tbere wee a question aa to the construction that should be
put upon Dr. Williams's words, and upon a fair construction
it might be maintained that he had but repeated the
language of St. Paul. The 17th and last article
required very serious consideration. To admit that
article would be to require the court not only in
private, but in public, to read and consider the whole
of this essay, and that without any reference whatever to
any particular articles of religion. Such a charge was
without precedent ; and he could not reconcile the admis-
sion of the article with the principle* laid down by the
Judicial Committee in the case of " Border v. Heath."
These articles, thee, must be reformed, by striking out
all that he had rejected, and by partially altering these that
would remain. Looking at the great importance of this
case, and that in effect, though not in form, he
had pronounced a decision upon the merits, he
would, if it were desired, give to either or both
parties leave toappe•l to her Majesty in Council.

?INDALL V. WIT.AOII (OLIE4.

The leagued judge then proceeded to deliver judgment
upon the question of the admission of the articles in the
ease of this, the second prosecution arising out of the
"Essays and Reviews," the decision being substantially the
mem as in the previous ease.

ROYAL AGRICULTURAL SHOW.

OPENING OF THE CATTLE YARD, AND AWARD
OF PRIZES.-(THIS DAY.)

The great International Show in Be ttersea-park
may be said to have only properly opened at eight
o'clock this morning, when the entranoe to the
eattle-yard, which had hitherto been closed, was
thrown open to the public. The machinery yards,
to which the charge for admission is still half-a-
crown were well patronised this morning.
Visitors
began to arrive early, and conti-
nued to do so up to one o'clock in numbers
far exceeding those of the two previous days. In
fact, the whole area of the machinery department
presented a busy aspect, and gave good ground for
the conclusion that the present show will be the
most suocessful of all she exhibitions which have
been held under the auspices of the society. Yes-
terday., as well as on Monday, the park itself bore
only its usual appearance, but this morning crowds
of people assembled in front of the grand entrance
to the show, giving to the place a sort of holiday
aspect, which had before been wanting.
Naturally, the great point of attraction inside
was the cattle-yard, the high price of admission to
which, however, on this its fist public day, one
guinea, necessarily limited the number of visitors
—still there was a very fair attendance, and perhaps
quite as many people were present as were desired
by the gentlemen to whose lot it fell to adjudicate
the prizes, and with whose movements the aggre-
gation of crowds of spectators might have seriously
interfered.

Several illustrious foreigners were early on the
ground, and foremost of these must rank Prince
Napoleon, who arrived, accompanied by his suite,
shortly sitar 10 o'clock. His imperial highness, who
was received by Lord Portman, prmident of the
Society, at once proceeded to the cattle yard, where
be passed about freely without being recognised by
the majority of three who were present.
Soon after 11 his Royal Highness the Prince of
Wales arrived, accompanied by Prince Louis of
Hesse, and suite. His royal highness, accompa-
nied by Lord Portman, and the Stewards,
passed immediately across the open area,
and through the machinery yard into the
cattle yard, at the entrance to which he was
met by Prince Napoleon. The two illustrious
personages shook hands, and held a brief conversa-
tion ; after which the English prince proceeded to
inspect the cattle, while the French prince passed
into the machinery departments.
The Prince of Wales took a rapid survey of
cattle, sheep, pigs, and horses, and was then
conducted to the yard expressly set apart for stal-
lions. His attention was specially directed tothese
to which prizes had been awarded, and the most
remarkable of which were brought out into an open
area, roped in for the convenience of the judges, in
order to enable the Prince properly to observe and
appreciate their good points. His royal highness
was thus employed when we left the show.
It is impossible in a hasty notice even to attempt
to do anything like justice to the cattle shown in
detail. It is, perhaps, equal to any of its prede-
cessors, if not superior to all, and has an advantage
in being the first to which foreign stock has been
admitted. There are about 500 exhibitors, of
whom some 50 are foreign, and an aggregate of
1,988 entries of which 183 are of foreign stock. Of
the 1,803 British entries, 682 are cattle, 285 horses,
642 sheep, and 194 pigs. Of the foreign entries,
108 are cattle, two are horses one is a pig (a
boar), and the rest are sheep.