The Express.
London, England, 1851-01-25 00:00:00

THE ' EXPRESS, SATURDAY

itself • Paden. Admitted to the bench of bishops t
while yet young, be has spent the maturity of his
strength and the vigour of his powers in thwarting
the efforts and hampering the independenci of the
laity of his church. If be has aver departed from his
rule as to proprietary chapel'', be tells us himself that
it has only been in very popukus and poor neigh-
bourhooda, so that the rich, who can afford to build
these chapels were not to be allowed to do a), except
under arbitrary conditions, while to the poor, for whom
if for say class, an endowed ministry is desirable, it is
permitted, though very rarely, to worship in an an-
consecrated edifice. Bat his rule has been, consecra-
tion, endowment. Never care toe the thousands who,
since he came to the diocese, have lost the opportu-
nity of hearing what was good for their souls, by his
fault, and his fault alone. They are gone whence
'they can never return to upbraid him. But sorely,
; soles* the primps and roomer of the mitre have ex-
' tracted the last drop of human sympathy from his
heart, be must sometimes ask himself the question,
" Have I done right in doing this ?"
Perhaps. however, we shall be told that the Bishop's
system has worked exceedingly well, and that the
astonishing number of 63 churches have been built
by his efforts. Well, then, do oar readers know that,
while these 63 churches provide accommodation fur
about 75,000 perscns, the population has increased
since 1828 at the rate of nearly 30,000 a year, so that
this notable scheme hss found room for about one in
nine of the increase, to my nothing of the existing
popnlatioo. And the London City Mission, in their
Appeal," state that in some of these churches doc-
trines more nearly allied to popery than proteatantism
as taught, while others are almost empty. So much
for the *access of the scheme. The expenditure has
been enormous ; the first 40 churches cost, in or e way
or another, a quarter of a million • and we have no
reason to suppose that the last 20:have been cheaper,
particularly when we remember that an " esteems-
ticsl character" is to be kept up, and that the scle-
siestical character of the last fire years has partaken
' decidedly of the" decorated? order.
We trust that the publication of this correspond-
ence will do something towards disabusing the public
of a common prejudice; namely, that the Bishop of
LONDON is anxious for church extension, es it is
called. To build certain structures of an " ecele-
siestical character," ard to attach certain individuals
'to those structures, said individoals bting also of an
" ecclesiastical character," and paid a yearly stipend
for reading certain formularies also of an " ecclesi-
astical character," he is no doubt anxious, but for
the preaching of the gospel, the true work of a
minister of that gospel, he is evidently quite
careless. "I found," my. he, " a number of proprie-
tary chapels existing in London, when I came to the
diocese, but 1 hare objected le the opening of any new
ones, and hare even refused to allow the re-opening of
some which had been cloud for a time." The plain con-
sequence of such a rale is of course this, that tho laity
are utterly powerless if they desire to provide in-
creased accommodation for any particular eistrict,
unless that accommodation be of a nature such as
jumps with the humour of the Bishop of LONDON.
Independents, Roman catholic*, baptists, can build
their chapels everywhere, except of course OD
the Bishop's estate, and on those of similar
landlords, the Dean and Chapter of Westminster
for examplo—those squeamish divines whose gorge
rose at an independent chapel, while they received
the rents of whole rows of houses which, to use the
words cf the London City Mission, were " the vilest
dens of immorality and infamy. Bat members of the
church of England are entirely at the mercy of a
Bishop whose course has been a tissue of compro-
mise, and the most consistent portion of whose
character has been the steady, bitter, and tyrannical
firmness with which he has, through a long life,
opposed the plain and simple enunciation of pro-
Itestant truth.
Now, we ask, is this to continue ? Are the laity of
the Church of England to be utterly precluded from
any exereiseofreligious freedom ?Are they to be bound
down by manacles, stronger than the fetters of law,
to hear just what preaching the Bishop chooses, in
just what place he chooses, or none ? An ecclesiastical
district being once established, is there to be but one
edifice where a clergyman may preach and a layman
beer ? To many men the grievance is trivial, for they
mn "rush into diseent," and be perfectly satisfied go
resign Saint Barnabas for the Weigh House. But to
that large and serious class who are by education,
habit, or conviction, sincerely and devoutly attached
to the formularies of the church of England, there is
to be no remedy, unless they are prepared, which in
zany instances would be impracticable, to chalk out a
new district, build, endow, and consecthte,and this on
the chart.* of a single life, with no remedy in case of
deception, and in simple reliance on the good faith
and episcopal forbearance of the Bishop of LONDON.

IN 1745, when FIELDING edited the True Patriot,
oppressed, he tells en, by the dreadful prospect of
a Roman Catholic restoration, he dreamed two
frightful waking dreams touching events to come.
Amongst other horrors, he contemplated the hailing
of the LORD Cater JUSTICE at Tyburn, and the re-
moval of the surviving Judges by order of the PRE- I
TENDER, and the appointment of twelve new ones—
some of whom had acme), ever been in Westminster
Ilan before ; and who, upon taking their scats, de-
clared in broken English, that " it was his MA-
JESTY'S pleasure, in all doubtful CUM that judgment
should be is favour of the Church."
It is probable that the great novelist did not fore-
see the Cardinal Archbishop of WESTMINSTt E and
his learned counsel, Mr. BOWSER ; and yet it is by
their agency that the changes, the fears of which so
much perplexed his playful fancy, are now, if ever,
to be accomplished. Lad Coax, they say, may be a
writer on dignities, but not a writer known to the
common law. No judge or legal practitioner
who asserts, or even surmises, that the law
of preentunire is in force, or whoso much as enter-
tains a doubt OA to the utter legality of all the cardi-
nal's doings since his birth,—deserves the name of
lawyer, or should be allowed to follow that ungentle
cult. Even the late Lord Cosncellor SCGDEN, what-
ever protestant. may think of him, is in point of law
only "a right honourable and learned person of loose
opinions." Hie speech on prirmunire at the antlcar-
dinalitial meeting in Surrey demonstrates his inca-
pacity for office. In fine their profession of h.ith for
terseness and simplicity rivals that of the sublime in-
scription said to be now legible on the chair of St.
I Peter, " There is no law but our law, and we are its

prophe ts."
Such, in sober seriousness, i the whole burthen of
Cardinal WISEMAN'S pamphlet of yesterday—for the
CARDINAL'S it probably us, albeit bearing on its front
the name of Mr. BOWYER, the now familiar addition
"by authority," and the usual formidable list of
works, all on legal subjects connected with the
church, and, as Mr. WARREN has shown in his recent
able pamphlet on papal aggression, all contradicting
and contradicted by each other. The "Milo Romano,"
however, is in this pamphlet particularly redolent.
Even the favourite "We," and "Oar" of the CARDI-
NAL, despite a few trivial inadvertencies, are tolerably
wellstuitained all through its pages. But, attend!, thirds
quite immaterial. Whether the CARDINAL wrote it, or
blr. Bowrze by his instractioni, the effect is much
the same. According to Mr. ROCHFORD CLARKS, it
was by attorney that his eminence appeared against
him when they entered the lists of controversy ; and
if by attorney, why not by counsel too? Better that
Mr. HENRY BAGSUAWE and Mr. BOWYER should
bear the heat of the day than that the sacred person
of their client should be made the mark of irreverent
assailants.
And yet, if we may be allowed to give our opinion,
we would say that it had been still better for the
CARDINAL to have abided by his frequently professed
determination to say nothing, than to have authorised
such a lame defence of himself as this pamphlet of
Mr. Bowvsn's on " The Roman Document. relating
to the New Hierarchy." Reckless in assertion and
• casuistic'l in argument, as both cardinal and counsel
I had previously shown themselves to be, we were
certainly not prepared for this new proof of their dis-
ingenuous audacity. We cannot even now conceive
the policy of making Mr. BOWYER rash again into
print merely to restate every one of the refuted posi-
tion. "urged in the Cardinal WISEMAN'S appeal and
in my pamphlet," to smert, unabashed by the
I castigation. so freely given by Mr. Waiters, and in-
deed from all aides, but of which Nir. BowsEs him-
it cell pretends to be entirely unconscious, that " they
remain to this day absolutely unrefated ;" and, above
I all, to furnish the public with fresh argument and