The Express.
London, England, 1849-03-21 00:00:00

BANK OF ENGLAND.

Yesterday o,7llCrsTitt;r of form, the votes by ballot
were taken for the declaration of a dividend for the half-
year of 64 per cent., and they were simply in the affirmative,
no tickets of dimentients having been dropped into the glam.
Mr. Knight, the secretary, announced this result soon after
four o'clock.

GOVERNMENT AID TO IRISH RAILWAYS.
MEETING OF MEMBERS OF PARLIAMENT.
A numerously-attended meeting of members of par-
liament, for the mod part connected with Ireland, was held
on Monday in one of the ermtnittee-roome of the House of
Commoni, to heir a communication (rem Lord John Russell
on the subject oilcans of public money to Irish railways,
and to consider the bed means of urging on the government
the advieibility of satiating in the completion of- those na-
tional works in Ireland.
Bir LUCID'S O'BRIEN, Bart., occupied the chair, and
opened the Wetness of the meeting by stating that he had
received (in Ms capacity of chairman of a deputation which
had lately waited upon the government) another letter from
Lord Jelin Russell on the subject of the intentions of the
govandadd with reference to loans to Irish railway dew
psalm The letter of the noble lord was, in Dinbetant*,

that the cabinet were of opini-n that loans of
public money would b 3 more heneficially employed on the
improvement of land, or in the encouragement of arterial
drainage, than in assisting in the completion of railways.
Her Ilsjesty's government did not undervalue the necessity
of making thorough railway communication in Ireland;
neither did they wish the deputation to consider this letter
as a final derision, because they intended to consult the Lord
Lieutenant of Ireland, who would be is town in a few dare.
Raving conferred with the noble earl, hie lordship would
again communicate with the deputation.
Kr. REYNOLDS expeased his regret that the govern-
ment had not taken another view of this important subject,
foe it struck him that giving precedence to drainage and the
Improvement cf the land was very like putting the cart before
the horse, as it would be impossible to make the lend valu-
able in remote districts, without the assistance of a railway;
the great value of land consisted in its being so situated that
the produce might be brought to market at a cheep and
rapid rate. He regretted the more the decision of the go-
vernment, because he believed that if the railway companies
who were in a position to borrow money on the security of
their works, were able to raise the sums required, in the
ODIUM of one week 200,000 able-bodied poor would be re-
lieved from being a burden on the rates. As this was a
question of such vital importance, not only to the poor, to
the owners of railway property, but also to the
ratepayers, he begged to suggest the propriety
of calling another meeting at an early day, to dis-
tant the subject, and of inviting the attendance, not only of
the Irish members, but also of all the English members who
were Interested in the progress of railways in Ireland. II
the meeting decided upon passing a resolution to this effect,
he suggested that the most advisable c. use for the meeting
to adopt would be to appoint a deputation to wait on the
Earl of Clarendon, for it was clear that the matter was now
to a great extent in his hands.
This suggestion met with the unanimous approval of the
meeting, and the proceedings were adjourned accordingly.

CASE OF THE REV. MR. SIIORE.

GREAT MEETING AT EXETER-HALL.
YesKrday morning a meeting was held at Exeter-hall for
the purpose of adopting such measures as may lead to the
liberation of the Rev. J. Shore from St. Thomas's Gaol,
Exeter. C. LVOHINOTON, Esq., M.P., in the chair. The
large room in the ball was crowded to excess, and the utmost
enthusiasm was displayed throughout the proceedings.
The Rev. Mr. ItINNEY proposed the first resolution,
which was as follows:
. _ . .

Mist this meeting having fully considered the ease, and the
maks, and imprisonment of the Rev. James Shore, affirm that =
strong claims to the cordial sympathy of all the friends of civil and
religious liberty, and resolve that an affectionate address horn this
meeting, signed by the chairman and the committee, be presented to
bins at Exeter, by such deputation as the eormuttiee shall appoint.

He (Mr. Binney) would not put Mr. Shore's case to th?m in
a manner which might 1. ad to the conclusion that they bad
come here to give vent to their enthusiasm, and for the grati-
fication of a party object, but would represent the facts
honestly, weak points and all. The Rev. Mr. Shore com-
menced preaching under holy orders in the year 1829. He
was curate of Berry Pomeroy, parish of Tonics, in
the diocese of Exeter, province of Canterbury. In this
capacity he served under the vicar, the Rev. Mr. Edwards,
from the time that he became a priest, ordain. d by the pre-
decessor of the pretest bishop, to the year 1830, when the
change in the diocesan took place ; and he cintinued to fulfil
the same office until 1832. In that veer the Duke of Seiner-
set built a chapel in this very parish. It was licenui for
episcopal worship but sot consecrated. This was an import-
ant point, and he begged the attention of the meeting whilst
he explained it. A mere licence might be withdrawn, or the
proprietor of the property might at any time secularise it
himself ; but if the building were consecrated, it enuld
not be converted to any purpose that convenience might
cuegest. A chapel not consecrated, but only licensed,
might be turned into a theatre, a bazaar, or en exchance.
Surely, then, it might be transformed into a nonconformist
meeting-house. (Hear, hear.) This chapel being built, the
Rev. Mr. Edwards gave Mr. Shore the nomination, the
Bishop of Exeter licensed him, and he entered upon his
duty. In 1834 the vicar died, and the Rev. Mr. Brown sue.
ended him. No fresh nomination was called for—not one
word was said to Mr. Shere, and he continued to be the mi-
nister of that chapel for nine years afterwards. Now, nine
years was a long period of time under any cir-
cumstances and in any place ; but in the diocese of
Exeter it was like a little eternity. (Cheers and
laughter.) He meant to say that there was ample
room and verge enough in the course of nine years for a
great many things to be done and said in that diocese which
he need not endeavour to particularise. The Rte. Mr.
Brown exchanged livings with a Mr. Cousins, and Mr. Cou-
sins came into possession, or war expected to do so. During
the nine years already mentioned, processes of thought were
going en in the mind of Mr. Shore with respect to the sys-
tem which his bishop embodied. When Mr. Cousins suc-
ceeded to the vicarage the bishop wrote to him to say he
should expect from him a fresh nomination, or else Mr.
Shore could not continue in the chapel. Oa Sedum-
day, the 14th of October, Mr. Cousins arrived in
the 'perish, and on the following Monday morning
Mr. Shore waited upon him and asked for the nomination,
when Mr. Cousins frankly told him that the matter was out
of hie hands, and that he had engaged with the bishop not
to give him the nomination. It also appeared, that whilst
that was the private understanding between the bishop and
Mr. Cousins, the bishop was writing to Mr. Shore to get the
nomination from Mr. Cousins. Mr. Shore wrote to the
bishop, and on the very day after he applied to Mr. Cousins
for the nomination, he (Mr. Shore) received • letter from
the Bishop stating, that as he had in vain waited to hear
from him upon the subject, he was bound to consider
that he did not desire to be nominated. Thus,
it appeared, that the bishop did not wait to hear
from Mr. Cousins the result of his interview with Mr. Shore,
but on the Tuesday morning, after the Monday alluded to,
the right reverend prelate, having "in vain waited "so
long, withdrew the licence and sent Mr. Shore about his
business. (Cries of " Shame, shame.") Mr. Shore had
ilium endeavoured to swertain whether he had been guilty
of any immorality, and he bad reason to believe that the
real ground of the bishop's objection to him was his (Mr.
Shore's) opposition to what was called his Puseyite principles.
(Cheers.) 'Well, the chapel was closed, and during the six
months that followed no fresh nomination took *co. It
was stated by many persons that Mr. Shore ought to have
left the neighbourhood, because the Scriptures said, " When
you are persecuted in one place, flee to another." To this
Mr. Shore's answer woe, that this doctrine applied to a man
whom the people persecuted, and added that " the
hireling fleeth because he is • hireling," end there-
fore he would remain. (Hear, hear.) Here then
was a sad state of things. As light peeped in upon
the mind of Mr. Shore, he began to feel he should not object
to leave the established church, and on the 26th Feb., 1844,
the chapel was registered as a place for protestant non-con-
formist worship by request of the agent of the Duke of
Somerset. Now came the mistake—the first false step
on the part of Mr. Shore. Mee the church had just been
registered, Mr. Shore preached for ono or two Sundays pre-
viously to his having qualified himself upon his ieceision
from the cherish. He (Mr. Bieney) did not think he could
do this with propriety, and, therefore. Mr. Shore had com-
mitted a blunder and a wrong. But Mr. Shore subse-
quently felt it right to put himself in his proper
position, and he went voluntarily before the magistrate, took
the oaths, and claimed the rights and privileges of a nos.con-
formiat minister. He continued to use the prayers of the
church of England, but he chose to make such alterations in
them as his conscience and understanding dictated.
Thus he proceeded for a month or two, and at length the
bishop gave him a gentle monition; kindly informing him
that he had appointed a commission to sit at the Seven Stars
Hotel, at Totem, for the purpose of calling upon him to
answer for his conduct. Mr. Shore replied that he
had nothing to do with bishops, or the commissions
they might appoint ; but he resolved that for the
sake of the people of England—for the sake of knowing the
law upon the subject—he would go before this commis-
sion. But he added that for the sake of his position he
would do so uoder a protest. The question to be inquired
into by the commission war whether or not there were any
grounds for bather proceedings against Mr. Shore, and the
reply made by the commission to the bishop was in the
affirmative. He was then cited to the Court of Arches, and
the charges made against him were that as a clergyman of
the Church of England, he had preached and had
not conducted the worship according to the service
book. Mr. Shore demurred to both points, and
it so happened that the Sundays fixed upon by his
misusers as the days on which he had been guilty of impro-
priety were subsequent I. his having qualified himself as a
dissenting minister by going before the magistrate. (Hear,
hear.) Mr. Shore's argument was that he had not continued
to act as a clergyman of the established church, and the re-
ply was, " Once a clergyman, always& clergyman." Upon
the other point, that he had not read the prayers according
to the Church of England service-book, the answer wee, that
he justified one sin by another, which was much worse—
that he had no right to make any alteration in the form of
prayer. Mr. Shore had been summoned to answer for his
conduct, and the result was that he was ordered to pay
the orate of the legal proceedines, sad he was moreover ad-
monished not to offend again by preaching in future in the
diocese of Exeter, in the province of Canterbury. Now Mr.
Shore felt that it was net the province of secular law to do
anything to interfere with the civil and religious liberty of
the subject ; and he therefore resolved to go forward volun-
tarily, and, for the sake of all England, have the matter
sifted to the bottom. lie was anxious to learn the true state
of the law, but he could not pay the bishop's costs. (Hear.)
Mr. Shore carried the matter into the Court of Queen's
Bench, and he there got this deliverance : Lord Denman raid
it was his opinion that Mr. Shore could not divest himself
of his character of priest in holy orders except under the
authority of these who ordained him. From this decision
Mr. Shore appealed to the Judicial Committee of the Privy
Council. The Privy Council raid nothing, but referred the
matter beck to the Ecclesiastical Court—just as the judges
say," You must go hence to the place from whence you
came." (" Hear, hear," and laughter.) 1801. war the amount
of costs incurred by the appeal to the Privy Council. Sir
Herbert Jenne, Fust gave the final judgment, which was to
the effect that if Mr. Shore were guilty of a repetition of the
offence with which he was charged it would be notonly against
his diocesan, but against the authority of this court. He
was them admonished not to preach again, and was con-
demned to the costs. This was the position in which Mr.
Shore was placed, and he had thought it right to bring the
facts clearly before them, because they were not at present
understood by the majority of the people, and he was quite
sure that his reverend friend would be entitled to the cordial
sympathy of every one who felt any interest in the cause.
(Cheers.)
Earl DUCIB seconded the resolution, and said he sympa-
thised with all those whose feelings were in unison
with his own that this was • great attempt
to oppress the people of this counu
The resolution was then put and alined unanimously.