The Express.
London, England, 1851-05-05 00:00:00

THE EXPRESS, MONDAY

OFFICIAL CATALOGUR—Owing to tb•
deism! at tita EthOaelas Raiding the OFFICIAL
IC.A-
L raNNOT PUBLUOIED UNTIL TO-MORROW MiIAT S.
grim% IRROTTIOURS, AND WILLIAM CLORE.] sad ONO,
Now Brittraatreat, WarAfriara.

gilt •rpreoo.

A %WM &Mos .f "TM F.epreeo,' owtsialne be moos melees
• Clowns." la pablistel every Toweday nil Y. Alai oyht, ta time
tor pot.
Arneerneemask inbreed ke "Tbe Yapese; Larks Lorain paper,
axe be se Ye Ones, le, Illetworieesnoel. by Tee o'clock es lbe

RION WATER AT LONDON BRIDGE.
Tan DA, -tiervia& 41k. Sim. A Reno" 4e. 435.
Itnnunw-Marens, A. le. .Altars. /if!`

LONDON, 3fONDA 7', MAY 5.

MEN can accustom themselves to anything. Mrrn-
ntoarcs fed on poisons till they came to serve him
as nourishment. The House of Commons has con-
tracted such a habit of leaving ministers in a mi-
nority, that they, the opposition, and the public have
alike ceased to consider such an event as pregnant
with any ulterior consequences. The ministerial
minority of Friday scarcely occasioned a three-hours
wonder. Ministers will most likely accept the grant of
the income-tax for one year; agree to a committee on
the tax ; and strenuously resist all changes in it
during the present acssion.
Nor is there any reason why they should act other-
wise in the circumstances. It was decided at the be-
ginning of the session that there is no party able or
willing to take the place of the present ministers.
The division on Mr. HERMES' motion affirmed
the continuance pro tempore of the Income-
tax : the division on Mr. Humes' motion merely
compels ministerstu take a shorter lease of it. They
must be mimed sooner than they wished to take
measures fur making it more palatable, or to assign
reasons for renewing it in its present disagreeable
form. To make the vote of Friday night the pretext
for a new ministerial crisis, or fur a second vote, neu-
tralising the first and stultifying great part of the
voters. would he too palpable a display of purely
personal soreness.
The division of Friday is in more respects than
one a remarkable one. The insurgent liberals who
have been enabled by " foreign aid" to place ministers
in a minority, are not mere flash radicals, neither
are they the most stern of the middle class finan-
cial reformers who profess to vote on all questions
regardless of the consequences to the ministry. The
Woditirs and OVONNOW4 were absent from the di-
vision, and the Manchester school was found en maw
in the ministerial ranks. The liberals who backed
Mr. Ilene are the quiet, steady representatives of
mercantile (immunities, who are in general ex-
tremely chary of extremes—The Mowarrs, Dritrar,
Duo. tss, and II isrms. If the aceesimion of the
Manchester party to the list of the minority deprives
it of it. character of a mere whig catalogue, the
list of libi•rals in the majority is one that cannot be
said to consist of reckless or impractirable men. This
will, it is to be hoped, mitigate any asperities which
such ilissent are apt to give rise to among the
liberals.

Ministers and their friends it is true, cannot but
feel Moro in their awkward position; they ham,
however. no reasonable cause of complaint. They
have provoked the mortification they experience.
The hest of sates might be despaired of, if en-
trusted to such hands as those of Sir CHARLES
Woo. The inesime tax is not the best of causes,
though better a hundred fold than its inevitable
substitutes. And Sir CIIARLY-4 Woof) has tnanaged
to throw out the income tax, to shipwreck two
budgets. and to render the maintenance of any 'lbe-
ria government almost impossible.
We must say that the Whig party richly
deserves its discomfiture, fur putting to sea again,
after so recent a disister, under the very same
financial ;guidance. Such a total want of tact,
management, capacity, or even conviction, wo
certainly never belwid in the conduct of the
most inqsirtant cause of the administration. In the
first debates of the session, we believe
in the introduction of his first budget, Sir CIIARLEA
Ns son more thun implied, that he looked upon the
income tax us permanent. lie has unsaid this
several times since, but never so as to undo the un-
towardeum of his first declaration. In his speech on
Friday night the CitaNcri.rwit did not indeed repre-
sent the Monne tax as permanent, but as n tax
necessary to supply the deficiencies of the
revs . And lie at the same time declared it
peremptorily, dogmatically, and almost rudely to be
ineorrigible, and • provable. Ile admitted the
income tux to be unjust, to be incapable of adjust-
ment ; he did not want it for any important purpose.
Ile would not have a committee, did not want infor-
mation, he had - made up his mind," and what more
use was there in talking. Such were the arguments
with which the financial chief of the whigs led them
into a division that was critical for them as a party,
OA will as for the great principles of both protection
and tree trade. Of course, it mated in a most shame-
ful defeat- a defeat not merely of the party, but of
the principles; undeserved by the principles, but
nowt richly merited by the party's mode of defending
them.
The rid is that there is no financial administra-
tion in the country, and no one cqtible of under-
taking it. The whigs have conrossed that they
have no better man than Sir ell tRLEs Winn); and
he has just proved himself worst• than nothing. The
protect sinks have no one for a financier between
the extremes of a schoolboy and an old woman.
The radical and the l'cclite parties have each able
men• but neither of them command a sufficient num-
ber of votes upon which to base an administration.
A • • try in it financial sense its impossible. It re-
mains, therefore, for the House of Commons to
take upon itself the management of the finances.
And, instead of allowing itself to he stripped by Sr
Cif XRLE4 W. 100,4 impossibilities, or by Sir Somebody
Anything's idea of getting out of the Exchequer the
rent, which the land will no longer produce; let the
rise triule majority consult together, and agree upon
a free nude budget. We have observed that the
Peclite parts contained financiers of talent ; and yet
we cannot altogether acquiesce in their views. They
are aguinst any save a temporary taxation of pro-
perty. They would keep up direct taxation,
for the especial porpoise of reducing what Mr.SIDNET
HERHERT eats the elastic taxer; but once the elasti-
city was taken out of thew, then Mr. HERBERT and
Mr. fit twirowt would willingly let their financial
system rest altogether on indirect taxation, and
allow property to go free. We can look forward to
no such ccifiximisici of direct taxation. There
arc tuxes, such a. the malt tax, interfer-
ing with one of the first necessaries of life,
which require to he reduced not only to the last de-
gree of elasticitv, but which ought to be abrogated
altogether. Why should beer be in a different cate-
gory from meat and bread? In order to effect such
haul reforms as the e,it would be necessary to make
not merely a temporary use of the income tax, but a
permanent adjustment of it.
As this, however, is never to be expected from Sir
Co tutors \Visit,, who refuses to stir in the matter, it
is subject of congratulation that at all hazards the
Howe of Commons has ordained a• reconsideration

of the income tax next year. and has in consequence
but voted the existing tax until then. Next year.
Mr. Hunt: may. perhaps, be met by similar
arguments as at present, such as the awry- 1
tun state of the ministry, the approaching chs-
solution, the danger of the protectionists. Hut the
tax can then. us now, be voted for the year. By
thus compelling annual reproduction, ministers ]
will be forced to turn their ingenuity towards
devising that fair adjustment which may entitle
them to demand such a tax for a triennial period. If
such a smw as this be not put upon the government.
direct taxation itself would be swamped by its mere
unpopularity and asuargi preoure.

TAP ecesvonidan in the Rasa at Commons upon
the announced synodal freak of fliabop Pititi.rorra
show, at least. bow large a share of liberty this 1
church of England boo to its connexion with the
state how calk its lavoisan may be perverted to
mischievous pawns and limmtions objects by a
disorderly. illi-nosnered, and bawling prelate; how'
unjust and untrue are the sompLunts that this
" church is in chains ;" and how suggestive those
complaints ale that their real object is to enable the
church not to liberate itself, but to enchain thy. com-
munity.
Bialhop l'im.t.Parrs has summoned what he calls a
9.ynod of his clergy to assemble in Exeter Cathedral

on the 25th of June next. This he bps done, not p
his private and individual capacity, bat vjdoe.
some power which, in his opioion, is so in that- et
episcopacy that human lbws eannot suspenicet. Apd
this,so-called synod, %e law officers of thoo.e_
advise its First Minister 'the biw of the land`Samicif

inhibit Bishop Pfituzorrs from calling and holding.
The law does not authorise, but it doss net
restrict him, say the ATTORNEY and SOLICITOR
GENERAL. All its analogies and all prac-
tice since the Reformation are, however, in
spirit at least opposed to such an assembly. Con-
vocation cannot be held unless summoned by the
crown; neither provincial nor diocesan synods can
be assembled under the Act of Submission for the
of making new or altering old canons; the
111315447:n0n (so timely referred to by Mr. Hoitanstt)
!expressly assigns the penalty of excommunieation
to any meeting of pnesta which may any way
tend to the impeaching or depraving "of any part
of the government or discipline now established in
the church of England ;" there is no producible pre-
cedent of any bishop of the English church having
so summoned his clergy ; and the Prime Minister of
the country has, with the emphatic approbation of
the House of Commons, expressed his dissent from
such a proceeding. All authority. since the Refor-
mation, with the exception of an imperfect reminis-
cence of a divine in the reign of JAMES 1., quoted
by Bishop l'illt.i.eorrs, is, therefore, opposed to the
step that prelate is about to take ; and there is not,
we will venture to add, another bishop who will
follow his bad example. Yet, because the law will
not prevent him, fur it does not permit him, he is
going to exercise almost regal and legislative func-
tions in the I.lo:Es's realm.
What lir. Pittttrorrs may now do, after his
lengthened career of intolerant bigotry and rebel-
lious turbulence, of polemical slander and episcopal
insubordination, is not, perhaps, a matter of great
consequent* ; except, indeed, when, as it frequently
does, it touches and restricts the legal rights, the
personal comforts, and the free thoughts of others.
It is hopeless to expect, at his age, a reformation in I
the Bishop of EXETER'S manners, a change in his
heart, or a softening of his speech. He will wrangle,
dispute, curse, and plot on, till he can wrangle, dis-
pute, curse, and plot no more ;—a scandal to the
church, and reproach to the country ; an object of
contempt and indignation to those who regard him
from a political point of view—of shame and pity to
all who look on him with a religious aspect. As the
' law won't restrain him, let him go on by all means ;
if it be only to ascertain what influence such a man
has over the 800 clergy, whose " Father in GUD" he
claims to be. Let us know the worst.
Bishop PIIILLPOTTS has, by, as he says, his own
episcopal authority, directed his clergy, beneficed
and licensed, to meet in their rural deaneries, and
there to elect representatives to attend him in synod,:
and to propound subjects for him to submit to sy-
nodal
consideration and deliberation. Now, his
clergy owe him, as their bishop, all canonical obe-
dience, "following with a glad mind and will his
godly admonition. and submitting themselves to his
godly judgment ;" nothing more. That obedience is
limited by the law of the land and the church. It
does not bind to black his shoes or to brush his hat;
yet he is not forbidden or inhibited from directing
them, in the name of CHRIST, if lie choose to be so
blasphemous, to perform such menial offices to him as
the recipient of apostolical succession. So, when he
summons them to meet in their rural deaneries for
this synodal purpose, though the law does not pre-
vent him from issuing the summons, their vow of
obedience does not compel, and ought not to induce,
them therein to respond to his behest; for it Ls ilchwv
the submission they made to their bishop at ordina-
tion. If his act, in Lulling a synod, be not unlawful
from the absence of laws against holding it, their
not paving any attention to his summons cannot be
disobetlient, because, though he can call, they are not
under any bonds, legal or ecclesiastical, to attend a
synod of this sort
In this view of the matter, Bishop Pult.l.rorrs' pro-
misting assumes the character and attributes of a
voluntary church. In responding to his summons
the clergy of his diocese will, then, take the first
step which the church of England has made towards
voluntary-ism. A synod that has no legal authority
must be voluntary in its essence and tendency ; and,
being voluntary, it must and will be accepted as a
movement against the continued connexion of church
and state, whereon, and whereon only, we take leave
to remind the clergy, consists the title of the church
of England to the property its beneficed clergy
enjoy. This, we say, is the inevitable logical con-
elusion which an assent to the bishop's SILIIIMOII9 by
his clergy will involve ; and it is quite as well that
they should be warned in time what it is they are
about.

The Ilishop, in his summons, says his chief ob-
ject is to obtain from his clergy a declaration of
our firm adherence to the great article of our creed
I acknowledge one baptism for the remission of
sins." Now, though most Christians would only de-
scribe that as a great. and not as the great article of
their creed, all orthodox Christians will at once sub-
scribe to it. And mere subscription to its articles of,
faith is all that is by law required from the clergy
of the Church of England, as is emphatically laid
down in the royal declaration prefixed to the Thirty-
nine Articles :

Though wane differences have been ill raised, yet we
take comfort in this that all clergymen within our rwilm
have always most willingly subscribed to the articles esta-
blished, which is an argument to us that they all agree a
the true, usual, and literal meaning of the said articles :
and Ma! ere, on thou. uriura µunix in which thepreseal
fL t'', retires lie, rain of all sorts take Me Artie es IV. Me
lat,la of Etayland to'he fur doss, trhi, It is an argtoneal
'wain tlot mole of ilscin inteiallany desertion of the artier,
rstnh

But subscription to it does not content this man ;
he will have subscription in his own sense. His
sense, he will have it, is the only Christian sense ; and
being t he only Christian sense, all who reject that sense
he will reject, and in the name of the Church of
England too. The highest court of judicature in
the land has, however, advised the QrEEN, as the
supreme temporal head of the church, that the church
of England does not exclusively require subscription
1 in BishopPitto.rons sense, and theQuer.x, as such
head, has deliberately acted on that adviee. Yet,
notwithstanding this judicial recommendation and
royal adjudication. Dr. Fittit.rtirrs has, as Mr. Hons.
M ss reminded the House of Commons, announced
that he will not ordain candidates for holy orders, or
institute presentees to benefices, who will not sub-
scribe in his sense; and herein he grows rebellious
against the Quzza in her ecclesiastical character.
As yet, however, he stands alone in this threatened
episcopal rnacide. Others, no doubt, sympathise
with his opinions; but none have gone so far as to
say that they will passively resist the law by placing
their own opinion above it but l)r. Pitio.rorrs.
But for one man, even though he he an episcopal
baron, to levy this sort of war against the crown, is
an absurdity that may safely be consigned to the
care of a parish constable, or, at most, be punished
by the stocks. Therefore l)r. PHILLPOTri seeks for
aid, comfort, succour, and support ; and, by this
synod. he attempts to enlist the -Clergy of Exeter in
his resistance of the (.IrEEN's authority. If they join
in the declaration by him to be propounded, he will,
of course, have, and use too. their moral authority
in refusing ordination and institution to those who
will not assent to his interpretration of the church's
articles. Every clergyman,then, whosubscribes to that
declaration, thereby joins the bishop in his resist-
ance. If the clergy generally were to do so, how
long, do they think, church and state could be con-
nected? How long would they have the guarantee
of the state for their property?
But this proposed declaration involves a direct and
immediate attack on property. For, if the bishop
be so fortified, it will lie in vain that the crown, the
' LORD CHANCELLOR, the universities, or lay patrons,
exercise freely their right of presentation to bene-
fices in this diocese. Their free choice of presenters
will be curtailed and limited by its bishop's dim-
, obedience of the law of the land. and his restrictions
, of the articles of the church; and that liberty which
patrons will continue to enjoy in every other see
will be do red them in Exeter.
It involves, however, something much graver
than an attack on property; viz., an assault on
the conscience, on comprehension, and on toleration.
The Bishop of EXETER. by this synod. is endeavour
ling to erect in the Church of England a standard
of dogmatic theology based on ecclesiastical, or
rather ;sacerdotal. authority. Now any such stan-
dard or test of ecclesiastical ilualitication limits the
free exercise of thought. denies men the fret use of
their faculties in the study of revelation, sets up
human for divine authority, overthrows habits of in-
dividual independence, and will root out of the church

• • - -
that jersatice of comprelensiori which, et times, has
bees atrehiefest glrity, and substitute intolerance for
toleratiote.
It isaot, therefore), a light matter, or a mere pro-
feoiossal squabble that-this proposed synod is an in-
cident in. It is the first formal 'attempt that has
been made to bestow corporate authority on the great
sacerdotal conspiracy that is on foot to change the
character, and, with the character, the religion of
England. It is from that habit of self-reliance, of
!individual responsibility, of personal conviction, of
separate freedom of thought and of action, which has
so pre-eminently distinguished this country since the
Reformation, and which was more fully developed at
the revolution of 1648, that the greatness of England
chiefly springs. For these national characteristics
the Anglicans seek to substitute tho corporate
authority of a particular order of men, and to make
that authority omnipresent and predominant in all
our acts, national or individual—in short, to reconquer
the country to priestcraft and its attendant agencies.
And in this attempt, the proposed synod of Exeter is,
we repeat, the most audacious step that has yet been
taken.

Whether, in the face of all legal analogy, of all
English diocesan practice, of the principle of resist-
ance to authority which it involves, of the assault on
toleration and comprehension which it will make—
whether, notwithstanding all this, the 800 clergy of
the diocese of Exeter will prefer their duty as citi-
zens, and their allegiance to the crown, to the in-
subordinate summons of their ordinary, constitutes
not one of the least interesting problems of this age
of transition.

~_