The Express.
London, England, 1849-03-27 00:00:00

MR. BRIGHT AND THE VICAR OF
ROCHDALR.

The Times of the 19th inst, published a letter from
Dr. Molesworth, the Vicar of Rochdale, denying cer-
tain statements made by Mr. Bright in the House of
Common., in the recent deote on Mr. Trelawny's
motion, referring to transactions which toak place in
the parish of Rochdale in 1840. The follow ng letterhas
been forwarded by Mr. Bright to the Times, and we
have been requested to inert it in the Express. It
will be seta that the vicar, " cot unknown to fame,"
has lost none of his rashness, however much his
memory may be at fault.

TO THE EDITOR OP THE TIMES.
In your paper of the 19th of this month, the vicar
of Rcehdale has denied the accuracy of the statements
made by me in the House of Commons, in the late
debate on the question of church rates. I could have
sent you an answer to the vicar's letter on Tuesday
las', the day on which I read it, but I preferred the
delay of a few days in order that other proof than
that I was at the moment prepared with might be
brought to bear upon the point to dispute.
I take your report of what I said in the House as
quoted in the VIM'S letter, namely, "In 1840,
in the last contest respecting church rates which
took place in that town (Rochdale), the troops
were called out, and the vicar was followed through
the streets by 8,000 or 10,000 people, who hissed and
hooted him in a manner mset distressing to every one
who cared either for the church or fur Christianity."
The vlcar and his witnesses *dm' t the crowd acd the
excitement, and the calling out of the military, and
indeed they do not dare boldly to deny the expres-
sions of disapprobation on the part of the pesple, but
leave it to be supposed that the circum-tancea were
by no mesas such as to justify the reference I made
to them. _ _ _

I was one of the parties engaged in the church-rate
contests of 1810, and immediately after the termina-
tion of that to which my obsorvivione rererred, I pub-
lished an "Address to the Inhabitants of the Parish
6/ Rochdale," giving a narrative of the unhappy pro-
ceedings connected with it. Of this pamphlet about
5,000 copies were sold, and hundreds of respectable
persons at the time would have attested the general
accuracy of its itstemen's. Tho "Address" contains
the following paragraph, which has a direot reference
to the point in dispute :—"I will not dwell on the
scene which presented itself as the vicar of this great
perish proceeded towards his home, in company with
some who had been his fellow-labourers with him in
achieving this triumph' of the church ; he and
they doubtlees felt their humiliating position, and all
the exultation which blind party feeling can indulge
In will not be able to efface the recollections of the
greetings of his nominal flock' as he paced the
streets of the town, where his preienco hss been the
signal for starring up afresh the fires of bigotry and
strife. I will not dwell on the mournful picture :
the minister of the church of England, the vicar of
this large parish—the police—the multitude of hie
unwilling 'flock,'—the hissings—the groans—all this
was enough surely ; but to all this must be added the
feeling that it was merited, and the consciousness
that the union which ought to bind a pastor
to his flock was unhappily severed for ever!"
I now proceed to adduce further proof of the correct-
ness of my statement. The flint is a letter from Mr.
William Chadwick, who for many yeers has acted as
a county magistrate, is one of the most respee'ed in-
habitants of the borough of Rochdale, and who is him-
self a c'ourchmati. Mr. Chadwick writes to me as
follows:

Rcehdale, March 24.
My dear Sir,--Having read your speech on the church-
rate question as published in the Tunes—likewise the
letter of Dr. Mol:sworth from the same paper,
purporting to deny the statements you had made
on the above occasion—in justice to your public
character, I feel called upon to state that your account of the
proceedings which took place on that occasion was mainly
correct. There were 8000 or 10,000 people collected together
near the polling booth. The military were called out, but
speedily ordered to withdraw, which they iiid. At the ter-
mination of the polling the ezeiteraent was such as my pen
cannot describe. Tee scene was such that as a chu►chman
I hope it will never be repeated. Dr. Moleswerth beim;
half a mile from the vicarage, if was agreed for his safely,
that lie shou'd be escorted home, which he was, by the niagu.
Crates, of whom I was one, a few gentlemen, and the police;
after leaving the neighbourhood of the polling booth, I am
not aware of any further insult being offered to the vicar, on
his route through the town. You will see there is no mate-
rial difference between your statement and mine. You are
aware that my political sentiments are milder than your.,
which may srue from my having had some 25 years more
esperience of human nature than yourself ; yet I should be
wanting in duty and respect to you, if I were to withhold
that corroboration of your statement regarding the tumul-
tuous nature of those proceedings which its integrity de-
mand..
I remain, respectfully, yours,
WILLIAM CHADWICK.
To John Bright, Eaq., M.P.

I think I have now disposed of the main question.
The vicar also objects to what I said in a former de-
bate, on the non-appointment of evangelical mini.ters
in the pariah. On this point I have only to repeat
that Ilhave heard churchmen more than once complain
that, as they had not 'svemgelical vicars, they ►ad
not and could not have evangelical clergymen.
I impute no blame to Dr. 111tlesworth on this ground,
for it would bs absurd and unjust to blame him for
not selecting ministers with whose sentiments ho
does not agree. I mentioned it merely with refer-
ence to a statement made by Lord Ashley. I must
suppose Dr. Molesworth to b 3 in harmony with all
that the established church requires, eyeing that he
obtained his vicarage from the late Archbishop of
Canterbury.
With regard to the many charges in Dr. Moles-
worth's letter, 1 shall say little. If they were true,
which they are not, they would only strengthen all
the arguments used in the House of Gammons against
the continuance of church rates. If the Doctor can
look back to the at, ife of 1840 without regret at the
course he then Writ, I think him beyond the reach of
all appeals that 0113 be made to him. If he was, and
is still, unconscious of the sorrow and indignation he
then excit. d among those whom the law regards as
his "flock," he must be proof against the impressions
which act on other men, as his outward senses seem to
have been unable to observe the manifestations of die-
like with which he was greeted during and at the
termination of the contest.
if Doctor Molesworth's letter had circulated only
within the limits of the parish of Rochdale, I
should not have thought it necessary, to make any
reply, for almost every man who read it could have
furnished his own answer to it ; but, appearing in
your columns, I have to ask you to insert this as my
justificat on with those to whom, happily, the doings
of " our parish" are not familiar.
I am respectfully,
JOHN BRIGHT.
London, March 26, 1849.

OUR REPRESENTATIVE SYSTEM.
RICHMOND.
TO Till EDITOR OF Till IXPRUS.

Stn,—Sorne 'sr:un--evidently one of tboss low-
minded people who derive pleasure in giving pain to
others—has forwarded to ma your paper of March 5,
storing under end Mar trating by care remarks the
following passage, under the bead of " Oar Itepre-
sentative System—Richmond (Yorkshire)."
You will cry often hear it said in London, " Oh, Lard
Beaumont is the person who coatested the North Riding in
1832, sad polled a very small number of votes." This is
altogether a mistake, and perhaps not a very fortunate one
for the noble lord. The hero of that contest was a Mr.
Martin Stapylton of Myton Hall, near Boroughbridge,
whose father, under the title of Dr. Brae, was a celebrated
quack doctor in York. The similarity of the names—" M.
Stapleton" and "Dl. Stapylton"—ar.il the aisociation of
both panics with the same distsict of the same county, has
frequently led to this not very enviible eonfu.ion.
1 need tot inform you that if the above extract is
not true, it is a libel ; and that it is nottrue a very
slight inquiry would have convinced you.
My grandfather, the fattier of the late M. Stapyl-
ton, of Myton Hall, York, was a clergyman, and
rector of Markstay, in Essex. He married the
daughter of Sir Martin Stapylton, of Myton. My
late uncle, whose whole life was marked by singular
emmtrie.ties, had in early life conceived same notion
that he had mode a great discovery in medicine, and
took, I believe, irregular means to make this known;
but at the time he did this he wu heir to a fortune of

10,0001. a year, and I do think it is a very hard thing
that for this indiscretion the children of the younger
brother should, after a lapie of nearly half a century,
be stigmatised as the desc,ndants of a quack doctor,
and one of the most ancient families is the kingdom
(Stapylton of Myton) scandalised.
With regard to the connexion between the Stapp -
tons of Carleton and the S•apyltone of M 1 tm, which
your paragraph seems anxious to repadiate, the mat-
ter is quite clear.
Sir Nichtens Stapylton, was seised, about the
year 1300, in right of his wife, of the lordship of Carle-
ton, county of York. He was succeeded by his son, Sir
Miles Stapylton, of Carleton. who was summoned to
parliament as a berm in 1312. Sir Miles was BlM-
cceica by Sir Gilbert Stapylton ; then by Sir Brian
Stapyltoi, who had (10.1 sons—Sir Brian, the ancestor
of the Stapyltons of Carleton, now represented by
Lord Beaumont; and Sir Miles Stapylton, the an-
cestor of the Stapyltocs of Myton, now solely repre-
sented by the children of my late uncle, of my father,
and his younger brother.
I trust that you will take an early opportunity of
correcting the very painful mistake int, which, I have
no doubt, you have inadvertently fallen.
I am, &c., C. It. BREE.
Stowmarket, March 24, 1849.

Robert Cuter, Hu , wee also re-elected u auditor.
A roes of thanks wu paned to the chairman and directors,
wham the martin adjourned.