The Express.
London, England, 1849-02-28 00:00:00

THE EXPRESS, WEDNESDAY EVENING, FEBRUARY 28, 1849.

&Hiltons, but that of the church ; if he were, he should
select another time and another place. lathe 27thArtic'e it is
said it is not only • also, bat • sew birth unto righteousness;
as also stated by Bt. Paul, Mr. Noel said he latrund bard
to convince himself of the truth of this doctrine as laid
deem by oar church, but it was too plain and he could not.
He (Dr. Addams) was astonished that any wan could so de-
lude himself as, although disbelieving this doctrine, to re.
main • minister of the church and weekly instruct the chil-
dren of his parish in the catechism where the very doctrine
is upheld, and he was there to prove to the court that Mr.
Gorham's doctrine was opposed to that of the church and
nothing else. It Mr. Gorham remains in the church, be
must put aside all the doctrines of the church and base his
opinion upon the 39 articles, which were, no dimbt, very
flexible. There was • eau in this very court • little
time since; it was a Mr. Oakley, who could rub-
scribe to all the articles and yet believe in all the
practices of the Roman catholic church. The high tractarians
distorted these artie'es too much one way, while the evange-
lical party did the same the other way.—Mr. Gorham states
that a large body et the clergy of the church entertain his
very views; he (Dr. Addams) felt such • statement was
essentially libellous; if such were the fact, they must be dis-
honest members of that church. The dissent of Mr. Gorham
is not a modest dissent, and he now puts himself forward es
the champion of those very dissenters,and in opposition to his
bishop ; and further, he had brought an action in the Court
of Queen's Bench. He (Dr. Addams) could not help think-
ing there was • great deal of contumely in such conduct. The
questions put by the bishop were consistent with the doctrines
of the church, and there was no one part in the examination
which could show the smallest inelinati..n for web oversy.
In the whole course of his sip fiance he met with a
book with less knowledge o' the subject on which it treats
than that published by Mr Gorham. In querioos 5,6, and
7, he declines answering them separately and distinctly, but
puts them together, then answers them by • discursive sr
gement. If the opinions there set forth are thou of Mr.
Gorham, why does he remoin a minister of the church ?
Why not join those ei t.nguished men who, difLring from
Its doctrine, could not any longer conscientiously remain in
it, and therefore retired ? How can he (Mr.Gorham)isonreien.
dowdy remain a minister of that church whose doctrine he
denies? He (Dr. Addams) would no. quote the 10th clues
tien and answer to prise* this. "Do you mean that faith
is an indispensable and essential erudition to salvation in all
pawns ?" " Yes, I mean that." He further states they must
all be worthy reeinienes. It we, not es aeorable to supp se
the church would adopt the views of Mr. Gorhsm, no
change that opinion which had been upheld for 1,500 years
Mr. Gorham says this sacrament is conditional, the bishop
na)s it is ureondirienri. Mr. Gorham further states, that
faith goes before landisin, and thi the blessing is conferred
by faith, In liege 143 he comments in severe terms upon
the cordunt of the bishop, who, he says, " acts untemmirely
in interfering with the privileges of the crown, for rot insti
Luting him who bad been a clerk for upwards of 37 years."
Waterman, in writing on the sacrament of baptism, says, in
referring to St. Au-tin, that all others were founded on
this very wt, that they were nothier without it, and he con-
sidered the Lord's Prayer a quotidian sacrament. In Let,
the dissent of Mr Gab en, as he bed said before,
was not • modest dissent, bet a noisy and rancorous one,
which he seem. d proud to proclaim to the word. He (Dr.
Addams) felt he had proved to the emit that the Bishop of
Elec. r had shown enough to justify him in refusing to insti-
tute Mr. Ourinm to this living, and that the court would
dismiu Mr. Gorham's petitionwith eau.
Dr. Robinson followed on the same tide. He raid, by the
conduct of Mr. Gorham the peace of the church was
threetened to be disturbed, and .sot by the Bishop of Exeter,
who was now before the court; 'he rgitarion was commenced
by Mr. Gorham, for the Bishop was only doing his duty in
examining Mr .O st ham, whc says he brought this case into the
court to decide a great and momentous public question. The
learned advocate then went through • variety of the questions
and answers, as published In Mr. Oorham's hook, whereon
he combated the erroneous opinion, as be stated,adopted by
Mr. Gorham. In doing so be writ through many potions
of the church liturgy, wherein the doctrine of cogs neration
by baptism is clearly laid down in a variety of prayer'. lie
then quoted from Bishops Cranmer, Gardiner Jewell,
Hooker (Book 6, or!. 2), Barrow (vol. 1, p. 544), Watermen
(vol. 6), Beveridge on the Thirty-nine Articles, p. 456. He
felt the views of Mr. Gorham were not those of the church
of England; he (Dr. It linson) was sensible of the import-
ance of this question, for it shuck at the very rot of the re-
ligion of this country. If Mr. G 'ham made his own opinion
on this quistien available, then where would be the eats
blished church ? But he must say this was the distinct
opinion of Mr. Gorham, and not that of the church, sr let
forth in his answers to the Bishop of Exote is questions, and
he was satisfied the court would bee that a sufficient ease had
been 1112411 out for it to condemn Mr. Gorham in the coats
whlis it dismissed his petit ion.
This closed the case for the Bishop of Exeter. Drs. Bay-
ford and Dean remain to he heard fur Mr. Gorham.

COURT OF BANKRUPTCY.—YESTIMDLY.
Beim Mr. Commierianer Fonbianque.
&fore Mr. Conimitoirmer Ilaroyd.
Es HVNTIIII.

Jos. Hunter, merchmt, of King William street, applied
for his certificate. He was sueperted by Mr. Lawrence. and
append by Mr. Hatton, on behalf of the pmidoning en ditor,
Mr. Urch. The bankrupt's debts and liabilities were 3,0001.;
estimated meets, 8751, of which about 2001. bad been
realised.—Mr.Lawrence maid the hearing had been ad-
journed on a former occasion, for the bankrupt to supply
ems dates, and for the sake of seeing what the assets eniiht
realise; he submitted that no new ground of opposition
could now be opened, as ths party appearing to oppose did
not appear on the former occasion.—Mr. Hatton urged that
the trade assignee was a friend of the bankrupt, and that
consequently there had been no fair investigation into the
I affairs. He bad been bankrupt before, and paid no dirt-
dend.—Mr. Groom, the official assignee, In answer to the
' Commissioner, said he thought it probable the property
recovered would realist 11001. ; there were debts in Java and
Hong-Kong, of which he could form no estimate.—The
Commissioner thought there was a prospect of a tolerable
dividend. It was true he bad been bankrupt before, but
that was twenty years ago. lib expenses, tol, had been
11,0001. within his profits. The certificate must be granted.

INSOLVENT DEBTORS' COURT.-7ESTIIIDAT.
Before Mr. Coeinaletoser Hark
TR RE THOMAS WILLIAM PARINI.

This insolvent, an attorney, who ba- been a partner in
the house of Partite and Son, Gray's-inn, as also a partner
in the home of Parkes, Carey, Blount, and Brookfield, and
subsequently in practice at Hereford, was opposed, ea his
application for his discharge, by Mr. Nichols, for Mims.
Hoskins, bookers, at Hereford t• by Mr. Begley, for Thos.
Bodenkam, Esq. ; by Mr. Dowse, for creditors named
Pocock ; and by Mr. Elmwood, for the detaining endive,
Mr. Andrew Jackson.—Mr. Cooke supported the insolvent.
The inquiry in tile case, whichoccupied five boon, was prin-
cipally in relation to property. The aggregate debts were
45,726 E, comprising three clams, of which the consideration
debts were 25,6621. On the other side the claims were 7671.
and:hers was a statement of property to 22,9401., which
amount was termed by Mr. Buoyed, as far es the creditors
were concerned, "mere moonshine." A long statement
was made respecting the property, in which the insolvent
alleged that he had an interest, and let forth the same for
his creditors. The insolvency was attributed to hoses by
bad debts, to the depreciation of property, and to law ex-
penses for ems years.
The insolvent underwent a long tenni,. ation. It appeared
that in 1846 he purchased the business of an attorney at
Hereford of Mr. Charles Blount, and became receiver
for Mr. Bodenham. Accounts were opened at Messrs.
Eakins', the bankers, at Hereford, and a separate account
was kept of the " Rotherwas" property, belonging to Mr.
B sdenham, which the insolvent subsequently transferred to
the general account, and a long investigation was insti-
tuted connected with the transfer, with the view to other
proceedings. There were some Chancery proceedings in
which the Insolvent was a party. and the inquiry now made
was of a general character. Re was separated from his
wife, who was possessed of property; and one of the learned
conned (Mr. Bargood) represented her trustees, on whose
behalf It was &Dia that the insolvent was entitled to certais
preperty set forth in the schedule.
Three counsel opposing, Mr. Bagley, Mr. Dowse, and Mr.
Sargood, disclaimed asking for a remand, the first learned
gentleman stating that the Insolvent had given an account,
now on oath, which he had before given to Mr. Bodenham,
respecting the transfer of the money, and proceedings would
be adopted against Messrs. Hoskins. On the pert of Mr.
Nichols, it was stated that he would not la for a remand,
but subsequently it was stated that he intended to urge
the ease u one of reckless conduct, under the discretionary
clam.
Mr. Cosa. Harris was of opinion that there was no evi-
dence of reckless conduct, an 4 nothing to bring the insolvent
under the discretionary clause. It would be advisable to
amend the schedule before the insolvent was discharged.
Mr. Cope, an attorney, claimed 3001. as a year's salary as
secretary to the Candidate Life Assurance Company, of which
he said the insolvent was attorney end manning director.
The insolvent now stated that he was merely the attorney.
The Court ordered Mr. Cope to be inserted for 51., which
would raise the question at a subsequent stage of the pro-
nedings.—The insolvent, subject to the amendments to be
made, was discharged.

I much oothfainatutad when they were told they were unable
to bear the bordea of a farthing Bute. There was another
objection which had found its way before the public, and re-
lilted to the peculiarity of the times. In answer to this, he'
would merely remark that if her Majesty's ministers
thought, Is order to get a cheap loaf for the poor
man, or to proteet the industrial part of the tem-
InonitY, that trade should be free, it was rot for
them to murmur or allow their public duties to be influenced
by the consideration whether free truth would affect agricul-
ture or not. There were public duties to be performed, espe-
cially by magistrates, and they ware bound to take care that
irveryttuog relating to the adminittation of public justice
was Properly and eflleisutly provided for. The pnucipsl
oklectkn to courts at Reading was that they afforded no
accommodation to the public, many of whom ware com-
p-lied to attend by *aspens' and liabilities to fines. He
would ask whether it was to be tolerated that the wife
of a p:or labourer, compelled to attend the mixes, should
have no seat •or even protection from the weather ?
It was a well-knowa fact that in bad weather many were
obliged to stand outside of the building, and, though the
magistrates and jury were aceommodated, no one else could
get a seat. Surely suit a state of things ought not to exit,
and, feeling a conviction that the public were trampled upon,
he conceived it to be his duty to communicate to the ere en
what he knew upon the subject, and he regretted that for a
time it bad been found necessary to remove the anise, to
Abingdon. Surely it could not be the beggarly rate which
was the obstacle to new courts. Was it, then, on lo:al
pro-suds that they were objected to ? Was it to obtain
political influence on a future occasion ? If so, it would
be the duty of her blojestp's ;retirement and de•
serving of their attention to inquire whether persons
who so prostituted their influence should be allowed
to remain in the commission of the peace. (Great
sensation.) (B. Wroughten, Esq., one of the magistrates
interfered at tois point and expressed a hope which elicited
some approbation from the grand jury, that his lordship
would allow a reply to hie obsereatiors ) His lordship ex-
pressed hie surprise that, sitting there as the representative
of his sovereign, be shou:d meet with such an interruption
at d did he expect to hear a murmur of approbation
from the magistracy around him, and ha could venture to
remind the gentleman wbo had addressed him, that accord-
ing to the law of the land ;he who interrupted a judge in the
exercise of his duty was liable to imptisotment. He had
felt it to be kis duty to address the observations which bad
fallen from him, and in conclusion would only observe that
whatever might be the situation of any gentleman, the laws
would aot be diverted from the right hand or the lett, but
must be vindicated and upheld.

Before Mr. Baron Plitt.
HIGHWAY HOBBERY.—J. Hargrave was charged with
assaulting on the highway W. !damson, with intent to rob
him, on the night of the 19th of August last. Tae 'prose-
cuter, who is a farmer, stated that on returning from Abing-
don on the night in question, about a quarter before 9, he
pautd the prisoner. After having passed him a few yards
the prisoner came up to him, struck him on the head with •
Mier, and 'mended his money. He refused to give it to
him, and said ne would fight for it. upon which they had an
encounter, the prisoner atrikii g at him, while he parried the
blows with an umbrella which he had. In the stru:gle he
dropped hie basket, which the prisoner ran away with. Two
days after the prisoner was taken into custody at Abingdon,
on a chug: of attempting to rob the till of Mr. Smith,
chemist, whose son caught him in the ac'.
The prisoner, having shrewdly cross-extmined the wit-
nesses, without shaking their evidence, thejudgesunneed up,
and the jury returned a verdict of Guilty. The judge, in
passing sentence, told tho prisoner that he was too clevsr and
too desperate a character to remain in this country, end
adjudged him to be transported for ten years.

CENTRAL CRIMINAL COURT.
OLD COURT.-Yr.mmiwAy.
Rect., the Recorder.
___

THE ATTEMPT TO DE;liaL'D 71i171*101 TIT WEATENN RAIL-
WAY COMPANY.
In the ow of R. Duncan, 47, haymaker, Mary Duncan,
his wife, who surrendered to take their trial, and P. W.
O'Brien, 30, printer, who were indicted for conspiring to-
gether to obtain money from the London and North Western
Ralway Company by false pretences, a verdict of Not Guilty
was taken u to the female priciner, and the jury, after a
short deliberation, retlrned a verdict of Guilty against the
two male defendants, but recommended O'Brian to mercy,
upon the ground that he had been made an instrument by
Duncan. _

_
The Recorder sentenced Duncan to be imprisoned for 12,
and O'Brien for 6 menthe, his lordship at the same time
observing that the statute gave him only the power to order
the imprisorment to take place in the corium gaol, and
without the addition of hard labaur.