The Express.
London, England, 1848-01-28 00:00:00

NAVAL

ADMIZALTT, Jaw. 27.—APPOINTIMMTS. Captain, R.
A. Yates ; Commander, 8. Orenfall ; Lieutenants, H. F.
Mills, R. Ward, J. Brydgee, and A. Grove ; Muter., J. 8.
Flinn and R. Read; Purser, R. H. Goddard; Chaplain, G.
R. Lewis; Surgeon, D. G. Miller; Assistant-Surgeon, H.
F. Williams ; Clerks, H. W. Warrington and C. J. Webb;
Clerks' Assistant, W. B, Allen; Gunner, J. Rattray ; Boat-
swain, J. Smith ; Carpenter, J. Mean : all appointed to
II-
Iwtriom.—Captain, T. W. Carter ; Lieutenants, P. W. May,
W. L. Loekyer, and G. L. Mono& ; Muter, J. King.
Clerks, J. G. 0. Simmonds and J. Moore ; Naval Cadet, B.
J. Brookes; Clerks' Assistant, W. Chown; Gunner, T.
Hayward; Boatsvrain, W. Lang; Carpenter, M. Taylor:
all appointed to Caledonia.—Commander: J. B. Patty, us
Rodney. Lieutenant: C. F. Leckie; and Surgeon; at
Dunlop, to Queen. Lineament : J. Palmer, to Powered.
Master, R. C. Allen; Clerk, J. Lewis ; and Boatswain, W.
Kenriek : to Blenheim. Captain, Sir H. Leek', Litotes.
ants, W. K. Nicholas and H. C. Veitch ; Masters, C. Pops,
H. Davy, J. Belem, and W. Yeomen; Chaplain, R. Wilson;
Surgeon, J. Lew ; Purser, J. Oggard ; Clerk, J. H. W.
Bowman; Clerk's Assistant, H. P. Scott; Gunners, W.
Anthony and A. Taylor; Boatswains, J. Harris and J. Da•
gee; Carpenters, W. Earl, J. Piper, and W. Williams: all
appointed to San Josef.—Captain, W. B. Mends • Com-
mander, C. Hall ; Lieutenants, J. H. Bellamy, W. H.
Moore, W. Lane, and R. L. Williams ,• Muter, J. Brown ;
Chaplain, C. Bellamy; Second Muter, J. H. Allard ; Acting
Second Master, J. Cements; Paymaster and Purser, W.
Brows; Clerks, H. 8. Dyer and J. F. Slaughter; Clerk's
Assistant, J. M. Hillyar ; Gunner, W. Kelly ; Boatswain,
J. Downs; Carpenter, J. Watson: all appointed to Agin-
court.—Midshipman : G. H. Cozon, to Prince Regent.
Chief Engineer (3rd clue): J. Vedder, to Fisgard.--Clerk's
Assistant . F. Penfold, to Hercules. Gunner: G. M'Grath,
confirmed to Medea.

SPORTING.
TATTERSALL'S,—Tarasnion.

LinnurooCiiii;i7i6ll;iL2lYiO tiiiist:Brunette (t).
NNW KKKKKK HANDICAP.—IO to lon the field; 10 to 1
apt Kimblesworth ; 10 to 1 apt Sir Peter Laurie (t); 12
to 1 east Millwood (t); 13 to 1 agst Reflection (t); 20 to 1
art Conjuror (t).
Cmunzu t, r. —25 to 1 apt Blaze ; 25 to 1 amt
Keleehe ((t); 33 to 1 apt Johathan Wild (t fretly);l3
to 1 :.Est Clumsy (40 to 1 t freely); 19 !•0 owelloll
(t and aft off); 40 to 1 aget Cracow (t freely) ; 40 to 1
apt Queen Mary (t); 60 to 1 asst Rufus (t freely) • 50 to
apt Lightning : 60 to I War
apt Eagle ; 1.040 to 15
apt (ilea B.adol (t) ; i,OOO to 1., .:.^4 81",ttani (t) ; Moo
to 15 apt The Tartar (t). Jonathan %Vika, Clumsy, Cra-
cow, Queen Mary, War Eagle, and Rufus, were backed
with great sptrit, War Eagle and Queen Mary leaving off
at an improvement of several points on the odds quoted, at
which the greater part of the money was invested. 26 to 1
was offered apt Blaze, at which odds a smell BUM was laid
out on Kekshe,

8OXIBRIZT81;1111 STAXES.-600 to 30 agst Vanessa (t).
DERBY.—Nothing done worthy of notice.

Law int triltatritr.

SPRING CIRCUIT OF THE JUDGES, 1646.
Oxman Cracerr.—Yesterday Kr. 'intim Patti :on and Mr. /unite
Cresewell, the Judges appointed to mooted and hold the tissues m and
for the several CO/Illtb eampeieed within this circuit met and finally
appointed the days for balding sub aufse—via., fur Berkabire, on
Saturday, Feb. 26, at Beading; Oxfordshire. Wednesday, March I
at Oxford ; Worcestarahlre, Monday, March 6, at Worcester • city of
Worcester, the day, at the Guildhall of the city of Wo;oester •
Staffordshire, Saturday, March 11, at the istle at stafford ; Shrop:
shire Saturday, March 18. at lihrtsrabury ; Herefordshire, Thursday,
March 23, at Hereford; Monmouthshire, Saturday, March 25, ak
Monmouth ; Olouomterahlte, Wednesday, Marco Pi, at Gloucester s
city of Gloucester, the rune day, at the Guildhall of the city of
Gloucester.

1111131..12. Cincurr.—The Right Hon. Sir Thomas Wilde, KM, the
Lord Chief Justice of the Court of Common Pleas, and Mr. Jostles
Monk, the judges appointed to premed on this circuit, elm finally
arranged and dined the list of days appotated for holding the
mien In end for the several counties eomprised within this circuit,
via., Nceilseseptometire, Tuesday, Februar7 29, at Northam plan ;
minehire, Saturday, March 4, et LiOCOLII Nottingham, Thursday,
March 9 at Nottingham' Town of Nottingham, the mom day. et the
Guildhall; Derbyshire, Manley, March ILL et the Castle at Exeter;
Ctty of Exeter the same day, et the Guildhall; Leiceetershire;
Bsbord97. Match 19, it !Amster: borough sod WWII of Leicester,
the same day, et the same plaoe ; Rutlsodshire, Thursday, March
L 3, at Ookham ; Warwickshire, Coventry diviske, Friday, March
24, at Coventry ; Warwick division, naturdiy, March 15, at the Collie
at Warwick. _

-•
HOAR elleoll,—Lord Denman and Mr. Janice Coleridge, the
Judges appointed to wafted on this circuit, appointed the following
da)• for holding the anises on the circuit— Hertfordshire, Tues-
day, Vehruary 29, at Hertford ; Versa, Monday. March 6, .t Chelan.
ford ; Kent, Monday, March 19, at Maidstone; Sure:, Monday, March
1,, at Lewes; cum! y. Mooney, March Von lingetco-upon-Tharnea.
The Western, Norfolk, North and South Wales, and Chester Circuits,
bars not teen &tally appointed.

COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCH.
Sitthugs la lianoo.

rim sisnoi or

[The following appeared in a second edition of last even-
ing'. erpreu.]
HROINR S. ARCHBISHOP OP CANTIRRCRT.—CONFIRSI-
ATION OF DR. 11.411PDIN.—Sir F. Kelly solicited the
indulgence of the court for a short time, whilst he ow
copied its attention in the present cam. Nothing leis
than the immense importance of the ease would have
induced hint to say one word; but that importance
was unspeakable, and rendered it imperative on him
to be certain that the whole case was before their lord-
ships, in the firm belief that they would not determine it
upon a mere motion upon affidavit, but following the example
of the wisest and most learned of their predecessors, pot the
case into such a course of inquiry as to enable it to he
earned before the highest judicial tribunal in the kingdom.
It had been contended that the case involved the prerogas
tine of the crown, but did it not also• involve the religions
welfare of the whole community ? What was the real nature
of the question ? The Attorney-General had eonfiaed it
solely to the prerogative. He (Sir F. Kelly), denied this to
be in basis. He and his learned friends, had admitted
the whole question, as to the undeniable prerogative
of the crown, to nominate to a bishopric; but then
was a wide distinction between the exercise of the prerogative
of nominating a bishop and the ecclesiastical ceremonials
emosequent upon that nomination. The one was done in a
temporal capacity, the other was a purely spiritual act, only
to be performed by ecclesiastical authority. The right of
the archbishop to examine in an ecclesiastical sense the tit.
neat of the candidate could not be disputed. This right on the
part of the archbishop had been exercised from the time of
the apostles until the hour at which he addressed the court.
It began in the time of St. Paul, as was evident is
his Epistle to Titus, and it bad been exercised by the church
in all times, and by all sects and divisions of christians, from
St. Paul's era down to the present day. And yet this solemn
proceeding was to be treated as a mere mockery and a form.
He (Sir F. Kelly) could not so consider,it, for if the ceremony
were a form, he was at a 10•1 to conceive how any other part
of the ceremony or proceeding of confirming and consecrating
• bishop could be other than a form. To admit such an argument
would be equivalent to saying that every oath that had been
administered on soch occasons on the Gospels, by all the
kings and prelates from the time of archbishop Parker to the
present day, were mere forms, and not binding. To such an
argument, which, he would almost say was impious, he
could not for a moment believe the court would assent.
He was firmly convinced that he should prove to the court,
that the statute of Henry VIII. did, whilst it con-
ferred the nomination of bishops on the crown, except
from all interference the ceremony of confirmation, leaving
that as was before, with the exception of prohibiting the
Pope or any foreign power from having any authonty to
confirm or consecrate ecclesiastics or bishops within the
realm. The history of the nomination of bishops, as laid
down on the other aide, was correct, save that it
was, In his belief, originally vested in the people. In process
of time it became vested in the Pope, and when the
power of nomination reverted to the crown, It became so
under the same stipulations that the Pop had possessed it
Now, with respect to confirmation, there was no authority
to show that this ceremony had ever taken place, without
subjecting the individual to an examination. In the Scriptural
themselves were found the origin of this proceeding. St. Paul
referred Titus to his reasons for leaving him in Crete,namely,
in order to examine into the fitness of the persons appointed to
be bishops and to be certain they were such as held faM
the faith that was confided to the immediate followers of
Christ; and yet, a ceremony which had been in force for
seventeen centuries was to be held and deemed to be a mere
mockery, which might be dispensed with at pleasure.
All the foreign jurists who bad written on the
moon law expressly set forth the doctrine that confir-
mation was essential ; and the English jurists who had fol-
lowed those writers, and who bad occasion to write ea the
subject of eoefirmation, had adopted their expressions and
corroborated their views. In Germany, where bishop were
else temporal princes, confirmation was always an soda-
siesticel ceremony, in whomsoever the power of appointment
might be. The, only exception to this ride was laid down
by loncellottos, but that exception was made by • writer
who lived under the jurisdiction of the Pope, who had, es
the had of the church, the undoubted: power to appoint
without confirmation. So that the very exception relied on
by the other side only tended to corroborate kis (Sir . Kelly 'a)
doctrine, that confirmation by some high ecclesiastic,' autho-
rity was =indispensable sequitur to the nomination of a bishop
by the crown. How did it happen that, wb the sub-
ject of confirmation was referred to in the law books, it wee
always found to be treated by the judges en part of the law
and wage of England in exactly the same way as it we.
considered in foreign countries? He turned now to the
statute and the great question to be determined, vie.,
whether the statute altered the process of confirmation, se
eitablisbed by both foreign and English authorities, or whe-
ther it was not oteseased on the prevention of the interference
of the Pope. tie did not relupon the title of the act, whist
had bola so math ealtialsad In the eosin of the argument.
but he rellieseilat ewe tette ird ontionothish was Hid dried,
to requite SINGIIIIIII6II osier the rails of premien,.
By the dhoti is of int mishits • pause d etaltlitar
lion was to rem & HI bolbre the
the intertwines et the Pops. rho ,
was, that ell the hums of elastic/1 a '
land ;4 '• 4MP_
secretion want ft mania th=a at • des
excepthst that NB be
hulls, am thould Cm= helm the
Part al the ebjesles thle efeetw% ed. • thee.
•
•