The Express.
London, England, 1848-01-25 00:00:00

THE EXPRESS, TUESDAY EVENING, JANUARY 25, 1848,

The Attorney-General observed, that hie edition was
dated 1768.
Dr. Addams, in condonation, said be relied on the text,
and aot on the glosses. Without eating Van Espin and
ether authorities on the canon law, he could not put that
law on a higher footing than upon that of Lonoellotus; and
then seine the canon law so laid down
had been, at the time of the Reformation, part of the law of
the land, and still so continued. On this he referred to the
dictum of Blackstone with reference to the provi-
dent of the statute 26th Henry VIII. But on
precedent this had been shown to be the case. The case
of Creamer had been cited. He, no question, had
been elected under conge el' dire, which had then
crept into practice. The confirmation of Creamer
was made by the Pope, at the expense of 900 golden
ducats, paid for the eleven balls under which that confirm-
ation was obtained. He (Dr. Addams) was not prepared
with any other ease in the time of Henry VIII. ; and in the
time of Edward VI. the question of election and confirm-
ation of bishops did not appear to have &rites ; but, at the
commencement of the reign of Queen Mary, the
sonfirmation and consecration of Cardinal Pole was
conducted in the same manner as now. But in
the reign of Elizabeth there were documents whieh put the
misent question beyond all doubt. It appeared that the
IMMO adopted on the confirmation and consecration of the
Asst protestant Archbishop of Canterbury (Parker), had
been followed to the present day. The history of that pro-
ceeding was recorded in the fable of the " Nag's Head Con-
secration," and it was fully recorded by Burnett, fitrepe ;
sad Bramhall ; and all these showed that the mode of pro-
needing in their days was the same as in the days of Arch-
bishop Parker, with the exception that, in modern casts, no
witnesses have ever been sworn and examined in proof of the
Übel and the summary petition which wire now considered
to be proved by their production. In Perker's case two wit-
nesses were examined to prove hie fitness ; and, with respect
to the Bth article, there was in existence an absolute deposi-
tion, on oath, by the half-brother of the archbishop elect.
This was material, as showing that in them early days a full
examination was gone into at the confirmation.
Mr. Justice Coleridge: What is the date of that pro-
ceeding ?
Dr. Addams : On the 9th Dec , 1559, which was after the
passing . f the statute reviving the act of 25 Henry VIII.
By the canon law he (Dr. Addams) submitted that by
confirmation was meant the trial at.d examination of the
clerk presented for consecration, though he (Dr. Addams)
had no means of showing the mode of inquiry into the the
and conduct of the bishops elect in the time of Edward VI.;
but it was singular that in Henry the Eighth's time all bishop-
rice were in the gift of the crown, but afterwards abandoned,
and the form of conge d'dire and confirmation adopted. It
might be said that these were mere form., but
he contended it had arisen from the desire of
the metropolitans in those days to examine into
the fitness of clerks presented for consecration. In tbe form of
ordination of deacons and priests, peewee are invited to come
ifs to oppose, though the learning, morals, end litotes of
these p-esented for ordination had been inquired into by the
archdeacon. But in the form of the consecration of bishops,
there is provided no such invitation to the congregation.
The Attorney-Oeneral interposed, and said he eculd fur.
fish the date 111 Perker's case accurately from Strype. The
etwepd'elire issued the 18th July, in the first year of the
reign of Elizabeth. There was no letter missive. The elec-
tion took place on the let Aug,, and en the 7th December
the confirmation was fixed for the 9th of December, on
which day it took place. And then, under his own hand,Arch-
bishop Parker stated that he was consecrated on the 17th of
December, 1559. Thus it seemed that more than twelve
days had intervened between the cony &airs and election,
sad more than twenty days had elapsed between the election
sad the confirmation.
Mr. Addams resumed : lie had no doubt those dates were
correct, hut he must remind the court that Burnett showed
that in Parker's case there had been letters missive.
The Attorney-General : The feet is differently recorded in
Btrype, who optimise of a cong d'aire leaving it ti the dean
end chapter to elect a man devout to God, and useful and
faithful to the Queen and her successors.
Dr. Addams thought that nothing material would turn on
that point. He returned to consider the statute 25, Henry
VIII., which provided that the congt, d'ilire named the
person to be elected. It wee said that such a congi d'aire
was a command, which left no choice to the dean
and chapter, which, if they disobeyed, they would
incur prammunire. From that opinion, though expressed by
Bishop Odeon, he (Dr. Addams) most humbly differed. If
the crown has a right to give a positive command to elect
Dr. Hampden to the see of Hereford, it bad not been done
as shown in the form of the congi &air* and the letter mis-
sive. By the letter missive they are not called to act on
their allegiance, but Dr. Hampden wet named and recom-
mended fur election. Therefore, the refusal to elect would
not incur prannunire, but would leave it to the crown to
nominate and appoint. Again, he contended that if the
dean and chapter had elected, under that letter missive,
any other fit person than Dr. Hampden, the election
would have been good. As to the form of confirmation, he
referred to " Leslie's Case of the Regalia," p. 109, atoning
the election of Hugh Follett, a Bishop of Hereford, is
1209, without letters missive front the king. This ap-
peared on an inscription in Ledbury Hospital. The I
proved that the bishops were elected, sometimes with-
out and sometimes with the recommendation of the
crown. tithe supremacy of the crown be such as contended
for by the attnney and solicitor-general, Queen Victoria
would be, as said of Elizabeth, neither mere nor less than a
" Woman Pope,"—(laughter)—for she could not only ap
point but make bishops. This he denied, and contended
there existed no such supremacy in the crown. In support
of that position he cited " Hooper's Ecclesiastical Polity."
The learned doctor quoted Hooper, to show that while, lathe
form of appointment of deans and priest', there was an invi-
tation to all persons who had any objection to the appoint-
ment to elite such objection, there was no such invitation, or
even permission, in the consecration of bishops. The learned
doctor quoted Bishop Andrews:and Stillinglieet, to show that
the crown claimed not the supremacy heretofore assumed
by the Pope, nor the powern of the keys in cede-
siutical matters, but ;simply Ole governmental prero-
gative and general superintendence of old time exercised by
the imperial authority of these realms.
The court at this point intimated to the learned counsel
that it would hear his further arguments at its sitting tc-
OITOW.
The court rose at half-past four.