The Express.
London, England, 1866-02-15 00:00:00

OUR CONTE*6tAitIRE

(TEilli DAY.)

00111.111EATIOS FOE THE CATTLE FLAMM
The Times attaches importance to the opinions
unanimously expressed at the meeting on Monday evening
of peers and commoners, at which, amongst other things,
the carriage of cattle by railway was denounced. If it be
tree that the railway companies believe the time has arrived
when the carriage of cattle by railway should for a while at
least be suspended, it is surely time that a similar convic-
Moa should dawn upon the government, the House of
Commons, and the country. Equally clear is it that
whatever prohibition of the movement of cattle may
be established should be laid down, both rule and ex-op-
tion, by act of parliament, securing at one stroke the two
great objects required, notoriety and uniformity. Though
acknowledging that in their objection to compensating the
knees out of a public rate, Mr. Bright and Mr. Mill have
hit upon a formidable difficulty which, if carefully
worked, may Nooses& in wrecking the system of
compensation altogether—the Times yet contends that the
plan of the government is substantially just. The whole of
the ratepayers should be called upon to contribute, because
the calamity is not a local, but a national one ; and the area
of taxation should be limited, in order that the money may
be spent with due economy, and the slaughter of cattle
kept within proper boaads by the world/cation that every
head of cattle that is slaughtered must be paid for by those
who order its destruction. It is earnestly to be hoped that
those who are anxious the measure should psis without
delay will abstain es mach as possible from criticism on
minor paste. _ _ .

The Daily News observes that by reminding the house
that a eousiterable pert of the loss was borne by the con-
somme of meat, and that the only compensation the cattle-
owners were entitled to from the country at large ma for
°stile coatpelserily slaughtered in obedience to a law of
pabbo safety, Mr. J. B. Mill struck at the heart of the
question of compensation. On the whole, the speakers
yesterday concurred in the urgency of passing some sort of
measure, and, therefore, accepted that of the responsible
government. There is perhaps some reason is Mr. Lowe's
apprehension that the operation of the bill may oease
before it is understood. But as no other bill is likely to
be better understood, this objection is more acute than
convincing.

- _
The Herald remarks that the (mations of yesterday,
will, with still more distinctness, be the questions of this
evening. A bill will certainly pau, and the compensation
clauses, however varied, be passed with it ; but on the sub-
ject of cattle traffic on roads and railways, and the differ-
ence between a oompulsory and a permissive law, the Herald
anticipates serious cossequaoes to the ministry unless they
submit to be counselled by those who have had a nearer
view of the plague and oomprehend better the great national
necessities it has created.
The Telegraph challenges all the arguments used by Mr.
Bright both as to striking the powers to slaughter out of
the bill, and es to compensation, and contends that isola-
tion does not prevent smitten cattle from communicating
the malady to others, and that if, for the public benefit,
the slate kills the cattle, sinks the ships, or confiscates the
crops, then the owners may come to It and demand reim-
bursement as a right. Nor can the Telegraph admit the
cogency of the reasoning of Mr. Hill. to whom it submits
the consideration that if we refuse sufficient compensation
to the agriculturisde we shall place obstacles in the way of
stamping oat the disarm, sad thus speedily cause the evil
to reach proportions with which it were v►in to contend.
The Star is exceedingly grat:fisd to find that Mr. Mill,
who has entered the House of Commons with a philosophical
and economical prestige which no other member has ever
possessed, has also the will and the ability to bring his high
authority promptly to the support of any member unjustly
accused of misconstruing the laws which ought to guide
government action. The government bill goes to the
extreme limit of allowable restriction of trade, and its
compensatory clauses are simply extravagant in their
generosity towards persons who have no claim on the
national funds.

LITATIS.

The Times cougratolatre the public upon being spar^d
the agitation of an soclestestical Reform Bill. The Arch-
bishop of Oanterbury has clearly pointed out that the
royal commislion upon such a subject as the revision of
the Prayer-book is worse than nukes, except where there
is a probability that its conclusions will be satisfactory to
all parties, whereas in this case then is a certainty that
they would be unsatisfactory to all parties and to all
classes alike. The gentlemen who have introduced the
man-millinery Isith obsolete names, which—though the
object of mysterious veneration on the one baud and
profound alarm on the other—symbolises nothing but
the common dresses of the later Roman empire, profess

an especial regard for ecclesiastical duties, and they aill be
giving the most direct contradiction to all their professions
if they cautious to disregard the authority in these matters
of their bishops. At all events, the language of the
episcopal bench will check the further spread of such
abuses. It is absurd, however, to say that the
peace of the church is endangered by such tricks of
religions display, which are wooer put down by ridicule
than by force. They have no claim to any more respectful
consideration. When religion is in earnest it finds some-
thing better to do.
Dealing with the Coleus* oontroverry, the Daily News
disputes the assumption which is sometimes met with that
the sympathies of liberals must necessarily be enlisted on
the side of any theological writer who attaches a new and
leis stringent meaning to the traditional belief of
Christendom. The !rake of a doctrine is simply in
its truth, and, ►cknowledging the freedom of association,
theca is no reason for forbidding men to make the belief
i• particular opinions a consideration of joint worship so
long as those who cannot submit to the terms are made
to suffer no social or political disabilities by their refusal.
Bishop Colonise probably would prefer to not his case on
the assertion that he legally retains all the rights and
privileges of which he was originally possessed. But in
the argument be employs in his letter to the Archbishop
of Canterbury be fails to make it clear how an institution
like the Church of England—a complex and elaborate
system of check and counter-check--can be transplant! I
entire into another country. We can very well understand
that an emigrant from this country may wish be could take
with him the church of Ragland exactly as it exists here,
just as he may wish be could introduce Into New South
Wales the British representative system. But in both
eases we fear that he must be content with the nearest
copy he can find, and put up with ecclesiastical
self-government and colonial @roods, as well ss
with universal suffrage and a nominated upper cham-
ber. The teems of the archbishop's avowal that,
according to his belief, Bishop Coleuso has been duly and
even canonically deposed involve the recognition of a pos.
Ohio independence on the part of the spiritual authorities.
Religious men in England dwelling upon this idea, must
some in time to ask themselves whether it is desirable that
the " oommoe law of the church of Christ," spoken of by
Archbishop Longley in relation to Natal, should be con-
trolled at home by the statute law of a parliament, for ad-
mission into which not even the profession of Christianity is
required, and be expounded by judges nominated by the
minister who happens to command the confidence of the
Hones of Commons. When that question is once honestly
pat, we can hardly doubt what answer will be given to it.
The Poet hopes after the primate's remarks to Lord
Ebury's deputation, we have heard the last of the move-
ment to alter our mitoh-eeduriug Prayer-book. The re-
vision they desire is 8o revolutionary of the doctrine and
discipline of the church that it cannot be thought of. It
shows great 'gammas to maintain that dissenters are
separated from the church by a few phrases in
the Prayer-book ; the &femme are the fruit
of totally opposite theoiorical jedgeseeks. At this
moment dissent is Wag woe to the church by the
gradual growth of men's minds in the direction of the older
theology, and the grain,/ extension of the church as a
working engine. Quakerism is fast becoming extieet.
Weeleyanisin holds its groped with diffioulty. The
younger members of dissenting families in a multitude ce
cases become church people, while the church itself lases
scarcely any to the reeks of dined. Only let matters ge
on as they now an, and a very few years will show which
is the winning side.
The Star thinks the members of the deputation have
reason to be disoatisfied with the archbishop fee giving
them, in reply to observations occupying an boar and a
half in delivery, the contents of a written doeameet
which he had cant ally prepared, perhaps days before the
interview. Dr. Longley certaiely answer, to the ideal
arehblahop of politicians, namely, on. who will be content
to bold the Waves artily by a policy of masterly inac-
tivity. His bump is simply that of ,a shsewd church-