The Express.
London, England, 1851-02-11 00:00:00

the. iv yangrOgi.

TO CORRESPONDP.NTS.
Atin:Esesient.intemled for •• The I:Spit.," Lamina Zetning plat,
must he at the Otltce, lb, houvcriactrcut, by Iwo o'c:otic on the
thy of publication.

HIGII WATER AT LONDON BRIDGE.
Tots tin. elms. Afternorn, 1111. 20a.
l'o.eroaaner —Morn:l4, 104. ate Afternoon, 10n. Cue.

LONDON, TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 11.

TIIE speech of the ATTORNET-G ENERAL is cer-
tainly cakulated to diminish the anger and disap-
pointment of those who looked to parliament for some
defence against papal legates and Roman catholic
synols, and who saw nothing in the bill save an
empty prohibition of titles, on such particular occa-
sions as the making of bulls and the drawing
up of trusts. We must confess that the bill,
as explained by Lord Join Itessm.t on Fridav
last. produced this disappointment in 114 it seemea,
to use an artistic metaphor, to be a mere etching, a
scratching in of mere tracery without depth, and of
invention without relief. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL,
however, has seized the graver from the hands of the
minister, and sets to work with a more resolute band,
digging deeper into the plate of the law, and dark-
cuing the hitherto candid surface with a penal hue.
According to the ArronsEi-GENERAL, the bill is
to do everything desired. It is not merely to pro-
hibit titles in trust deeds, but render the wearing of
territorial titles at all by Roman catholic prelates a
punishable act. Not may will it be penal to style
oneself Archbishop of Westminster, but even the
assumption of the title of Archbishop in Westminster
has its peril, if it can be construed into the
evasion of an express law. As to synodical action, it
is completely to preclude that, by preventing the
existence or circumscription of even dioceses.
Synodical or clerical influence intimidating the suer
jests of her 'MAJESTY from acts of duty, by threats of
refusing sacrament, or casting off from the church—
such aggressions as these the A rronNEv-GExEn.u..
considered to be too clearly punishable by common
law to require any new or express legislation to pr 0....
....

hibit them.
We must confess that we arc glad to hear that the
common law exists as an antagonist, so ready and so
well armed, to the canon law. Sir EDWARD SUGDEN,
indeed, declared as much. Rut the law officers of the
crown, we understand, had very recently not so favour.
able an opinion of the omnipotence of the common law,
or even of statutes : and we were bidden to look to
parliament alone fur defence. Indeed not the least
fearful result of what is called synodical action
might be felt on the institution of the jury itself,
through which the common law might be uulThied—
equally nullified whether a jury came to consist of
fanatics of one side or of the other. It may indeed
be strongly
.doubted whether trial by jury could
long subsist in any country completely subjected to
sacerdotal influence.
We by no means place implicit credence in the
ATIOINEI-GENEILAL. We cannot see that the com-
mon law, even though Mr. PAGE WOOD supports the
opinion, is at all efficient for the purpose alleged, nor
the new statute efficient for the object it aims at.
The object is to intimidate Route, to awe the popul
court to retract:ohm, and cause its cardinal agent to
measureback his stepsfromWestminster to the Vatican.
We are bold to prophesy that the bill will have no
such result. The audacity of the Cardinal will
nut be abashed by any low, the stringency of which
depends upon the nerve of the Arrintsfir-OENEttat.
The Pun:, who can prolong his residence amongst
his subjects solely by Austrian and by French sup-
port, must do what Austrian policy dictates to him,
the French having no policy or will fur the present ;
• and to spite Queen Vic-mien., the cabinet of
Vienna will order WISEMAN to bravo Windsor just
as it ordered the Austrian and Bavarian troops to oc-

cupv Coburg.
Whilst the ArronNET-GF-VERAL explained the
strategy of the government against the enemy from
without, Lord ASHLEY undertook to point out the
movements of the enemy from within. Two
speakers during the course of the debate had taken
advantage of the question to launch into denuncia-
tions of the established church. Now there arc
mans accusations to be brought against the esta-
blished church in Ireland, and in England, and we
arc nut amongst the most tartly to make them. But
we crust own that the present strikes us as the most
unfit and most ungenerous occasion. For if the
Anglican church have one good quality, it is that of
the perfect freedom of the laity from sacerdotal in-
fluence or dictatorship. Not only in it are the
laity in fair independence of the clergy, but
also with regard to religious opinions men enjoy
a fair independence of each other, which cannot
be asserted of all sects, even of those who style
themselves the most free. Most anti-papal in its
principle, despite of the efforts made to wrest or to
betray it to the antagonist creed, the established
church rallies to it the larger portion of the educated
and influential classes oftUs country, on which great
dependence must be laid in a general protestant re-
sistance to Rome. Wu certainly, then, do agree
with Lord ASHLEY in thinking that when danger
threatens from the progress of Rome and its suer-
dotalism, it is for all protestant sects and persuasions
to unite, in what is a common interest and a common
defence. Mr. Itomsueic threatens dissenters with
the whip, if the established church succeeded in put-
ting down the arrogant sacerdotalism of Rome. Dr.
VAUGHAN, with more justice, tells us, in that most
excellent article in the last British Quarterly
Benicia :
- -

The boasted fact, that catholicism is immutable alike in
its spirit and its theory, to which both it. past history and
its recent manifestations compel us to assent, demonstrates
the conclusion that, it' ever it should control again the visit
power and state of England, dissenters would be its first
victims. They would be the only remaining obstacles to its
absolutism in church and state. Liberty of conscience,
toleration, charity, or forbearance towards those that dissent
from its dogmas is neither discoverable among its laws, nor
compatible with its spirit, nor legible in its history. If,
therefore, the day should ever arrive when it could give law
to the rulers of this country. or compel them to listen
to its counsels, we know full well that its maxim would
be " Chastise all protestants with whips, but the dissenters
with scorpions."
But whatever may be the danger of papal aggres-
sion, or the fears entertained of it throughout all
classes of the country, one thing is certain, that par-
liament is agitated in a very trifling degree with
such thoughts. So that if Lord JOHN itt'S',ELL'S
measure is to be accused of lukewarmness, the
accusation may be extended to parliament. The
knowing ones of the House of Commons evidently care
very little for the question. There is little political
capital, and in truth rather the contrary of political
•
capital, to he made out of it. :Ministers have been
wary, and have not presented a week side either to
the fanatics or the philosophers. There were no
prospects of any trick by which a combination of
parties might have been got together against minis-
tens. The consequence was no amendment, and a lan-
guid debate adjourned to that purgatory of dull
motions, a morning sitting. The country feels an
insult, and clamours for a right. Parliament cures little
• for either one or the other, unless a close division
were likely to be its result, with a ministerial crisis
M prospect n.
Mr. DISRAELI'S motion, which does not command
one-hundredth part of the interest felt in the country