The Express.
London, England, 1850-12-06 00:00:00

glte erpreOfs.

TO CORRESPONDENTS.
Adrertletzsentslatroded lair "The Espreek.Lcodoet Zees's( piper,
most be at the (Moe, 10, Bourerie•scroot, by Two o'clock ow tbe
ilsy of poialcatioa.

HIGH WATER AT LONDON BRIDGE.
Its MT —Morning. A no. _Mimeos. A. net.
Toaa•ww—YorWg. Y. 4a.........A11enea5. Y.M.

LONDON, FRIDAY. DEMMER 6.

THE answer of Lord lons RUSSELL to the deputa-
tion on the subject of county taxation and expendi-
ture is curiously significant. Without doubt, says
the Minister, the present order of things is indefec-
tible. It is not consistent with the sigh's of man or
the Eng:ish constitution that the lord-lieutenant of
• county or his nominees, the justices, should have the
power to levy taxes on the inhabitants, and squander
wuat they levy, to the tune of a million and a half
int- annum, and that the tax-payers should not have
some voice in their nominrion, or some control
over their ac's. There is no reason in the
world why we have not long ago done for
them rural ratepayers what we have done for the
borough ratepayers, and repealed all the mischievous
Louses, whether clothed in forms of law or not, by which
the former are to this hour obstructed from the enjoy-
ment of that undoubted birthright of every English-
Man—taxation by representation. The counties, hun-
dreds, and townships, are municipalities more ancient
than the cities and b Roughs of the Municipal Corpo-
rations Act, and much more in need of reformation.
This is the substance of Lord JoHe Ruserxes con-
cets,ons to the earnest appeal of the deputation from
the countita which waited upon him last Wednesde y.
But then, eels his lordship, the government cannot be
expected to do anything in the matter until there is a
general "movement" out of doors; that is to say,
legit discontent has ripened into agitation, or, per-

haps, into something Worms.
It may be true that the chief seat of the " move-
ment," as Lord ionic Russet'. terms it, is the grea
and important county of Lancaster. But it is equally
true, as stated by the Yorkshire del, gate s, that their
county—sorely not less great, nor less important—
has adhered to the movement which began in Lan-
osshire, and is even improving on its mrdel. For it
appears that, whilst Lancashire is not altogether
din-
to renew the experiment of • compromise,
liirtexieoffes once more to the country justices the
rejected bill of last session, Yorkshire is lees trac-
table. Many of the local newspapers say they
are opposed to Mr. MILNER GIBSON'S Bill, as not
going far enough, and are advocating a much more
sweeping change in the pm sent system. The same
spirit, as we infer from the names of some of the
delegates from other counties, is spreading every-
where. Lord Duneeer STUART. in the name of the
Metropolitan county ratepayers, threatens the Paa-
MIER with a very pretty " movement " in Surrey and
Middlesex, now that the canoe of the ministerial he-
sitation is at length understood. Altogether we see
no reason to despair of a very general and a very
energetic resporse, befure parliament meets, to Lord
lonic Resartee conjuration.
But if the people take op this cause of theirs in
hearty earn's*, is it credible that they will now content
themselves with that mere instalment of justice
which their faintly supported advocates in the last
session were ready to accept? le it worth while to
agitate largely fur a county board, to be composed,
one half of justices of the peace, and the other half of
members elected by the poor law guardian., and con-
taining tot ate representative of the ratepaying
peopl? If it be not proposed to comprehend the
boroughs of Ragland in this scheme of local taxation,
why do the advocates of self-imposed taxation insist
so etrenuon.ly upon this particular scheme, as being
the only one suited to carry out their purpose in the
counties ?
For our part, we have repeatedly expressed our
opinion that the simpler and more constitutional plan
would be to ignore the justices of the piece altogether
in their ridiculous pretensions to the sole keeping of
the public purse, and to apply to the management of
county finance the known and used principles and
details of borough-rate administration. This neces-
sarily involves the separation of magisterial and minis-
terial functions, the former to be exercised by the
majistratee, the latter by a county board composed of
the representatives of the people, all elected by the
ratepayers in each hundred. To this body we would
not only made the levy and administration of the
rates now levied and administered by the justices,
bat also all municipal functions whatsoever,—now
subsisting or hereafter to be created,—under
which last head we may particularly men-
tion all such as are requisite to that broad
and national system of education which, sooner
or later, the people will wring from parliament. As
for the magisterial functions, we continue to think
that they will be more usefully, and also more satis-
factorily, exercised, when vested in persons ng
the confidence of their fellow-shiremen. 7i:rest :us

when the conservators of the peace were elected by
the shire. That was put an end to by the statute of
EDWARD 111.; but it was a good custom, and it may
be resumed by the same legislative power which de-
str3yed it. 'the magistrates in boronehs and cities
are the aldermen of those municipalities. They are
chosen by the ratepayers : why not the magistrates
of the counties also? It will be hard indeed for any
man, though he be Sir JOIIN PARINOTON himself, to
say why not.
In other words, we prefer very much the bill pre-
anted by Mr. HURL in 1836, for England, or that
presented in the same year by Sir RICRUID M us-
CRAVE for Ireland, to the bill of Mr. MILNER GIB-
SON ; and eo, we think, does the right honourable
gentleman himself. His bill was brought forward avow-
edly u a compromise. But the compromise, when
(dieted, was related, under circumstances which leave
it more than doubtful whether a renewal of the experi-
ment will now bs more hopeful of success than a bold
and unconditional demand of Mr. Hors's measure,
well supported out of doors, is like to be. It is
worthy of note, that when, on the 21st of Jane, 1838,
Mr. Hume obtained leave to bring in his bill " to
separate the financial from the judicial affairs of the
counties in England and Wales, and to autho-
rise the rateplyers in counties to choose repro-
untatives to form a county-board for the eressemmak
levying, and administration of the county rates
and financial 'Uri of counties in England and
Wales,' the late Sir EARDLEY Witmor, then at the,
head of the party of justices of the peace in parlia-
ment was the only speaker, and had not a word to
say against it. Oe the contrary, if we may believe
the " Mirror of Parliament" for that year (voL
p. 1992), the magisterial mind, represented by the
tory baronet, " conceived that Mr. HMIs did not go
jar enough, and wished him to carry his reform
a step further, and, as he had adopted the Municipal
Commissioners' report as a guide for the financial
arrugement, to adopt it likewise as a guide in other
respects; and instead of having a body of justices
and chairman to preside in court for the trial of
offenders, to propose a county recorder appointed and
paid by the crown, who should be a barrister of
not less than seven years' standing, acd who should
sit not only at the Quarter Sendoes, but at the
carious sessions of the county." Nair was this the ut-
most extent of tory coacession in the year of grace
1836: for we find Sir PAROLEE Wihmor winding up
thus :—" To the election of justices, ss
.propoeed by
the honourable member, I ire no *fawn, but that
they are not required to have any qualification."
It is true that the personal wishes of the them
reigning sovereign were known to be in favour of the
change as proposed by Mr. Hume, and that the tense
were doiog their utmost at that time to regain the
estranged affection of WILLIAM the FOURTH. Still
we cannot think that seen the conservatives of the

present day are so entirely lost to all' sense of the
pat honours of their party, as to recede altogether from
the terms they offered in 1836 to the crown lad its
lieges by the mouth of Sir EMMET Wamat.

Was? are the precise legal limits of the doctrine
of the QUEEN'S supremacy, as it affects the Roman
catholic subjects of her Majesty in their relations to
the crown of these realms, is a question of consider-
able interest at the present moment. This question
Mr. MOTET has set himself to answer in a pamphlet
just published i• and, without pledging ourselves to
en agreement with all his conclusion*, we are bound
to uy that, especially when his known theological
opinions are taken into account, he has executed his
teat with candour, learning, and research.
The royal supremacy may be regarded in a three-
fold light, as temporal, ecclesiastical, and spiritual.
When enjoyed to the fall extent, it makes the sove-
reign supreme, not only over ill onuses, ecclesiastical
and civil, within his dominions, but also in all mat-
ters of ,
faith doctrine, and church discipline. It is
thus that it is understood by HOOKER in the follow-

ins passage :
Whim Chrhtian kings are maid to have spiritual dominion
6T supremo power in oclesiutical affairs sad canoes, the
meaning is, that within their an
own precincts d territories
they. have suthority and power to p
recinct in matters of
Childian religion, and that shire is De higher or prestor
that ma over-command them where they are platted to act.
Power of spiritual dominion therefore is, in canoes social
astical, that relies authority which neither say foreign
state, nor any part of the body politic at home, wherein ibis
same was establlsluod, can lawfull overrule.—Boal. Pol.,

hoe; rlii., p. 442.
Historieslly !speaking, it is quite clear that the
Saxon kings of England enjoyed undoubted ecclesias-
tical, if not also spiritual, supremacy within their
realm : many instances of their direct and sometimes
violent exertion of authority in matters ecclesiastical
are cited by Lord COI; in that famous comment on
the act of supremacy—his report of CAWDIMII case.
Conclusive evidence of the point (if more were want-
ing) is to be found io the fact referred to by Mr.
MOTET, that the Bishop in those early times sate side
by side with the sheriff, to judge eccles'astical exams
in the courts of the shire, which were the king's

courts.
Such was the first stage in the history of the royal
supremacy in this country in matters ecclesiastic 1.
The second era commenced with that ordinance of
the Cuequeror which separated the two jurisdictions,
and removed the " Placita Ecclesie" from the shire
oourt to a distinct tribunal, over which the Bishop
alone we* to preside. With this ordinance began the
long conflict of jurisdiction between the bishops of
Rome on oce side and tee kings and people of England
on the other, which, through many alternations of
submission and resistance, continued to harass the
land till the final renunciation by HENRY VIII, of the
whole doctrine of the papal supremacy.
It was during this period that those statutes were
pawed, which take their name from a corruption of
the first Latin word of the writ which they origi-
nated, called the writ of "prenioneri The
substance of the various acts of prremunire, their pro-
hibitions and their penalties,_ are given with great
clearness by Mr. ANSTEY. Amongst the most im-
portant of thes3 with reference to the late aggreo-
stone, are in the act of the 30th of EDWARD lIL
(st. 2, c. 1), imposing the penalties of prismunire on
all who "impetrate at the court of Rome" "dignitie",
offices, hospitals, or church benefices whatsoever ;"
and certain statutes of the 25th of HENRY VIII.
(c. 21 and 22), imposing like penalties on all who
" purchase or procure" at the court of Rome " trans-
!mime, processes, sentences of excommunication,
bulls, instruments, Itc."
Peeving by these different enactment', we proceed
at once to the celebrated law which inaugurated the
reign of the great protestant Queen, and fixed the
great protestant doctrine of the royal supre-
macy. The first thing to be remarked about
this Act of Supremacy (1 Elie., cap. 1) is, that as
Lord COKE carefully points out in CAWDRY's case, it
was intended to be, and, in f.,ct, was an affirmation of
the common law. Its title conclusively shows this:
it is called in the Statute Book "An Act Restoring to
the Crown the Ancient Jurisdiction over the State
Ecclesiastical and Cita," It does not fall within the
scope of Mr. ARREST'S present purpose to dl more
than refer generslly to this act; but in thous days,
' when the first principles cf our protestant constitu-
' lion in church and state are so freely called in ques.
thy, it may not be amiss to cell attention to the terms
of the two famous clauses, by the first of which for, ign
authority in matters ecclesiastical is abolished, and by
the second, ecclesiastical jurisdiction annexed to the
crown. The former clause enacts

Tbst so foreign prince, person, prelate, state, or potentate,
spiritsal cr temporal, shall at say time after the lest day of
this session of parliament, see, enjoy, or ezerclm, any
EMMY of power, jurisdiction, superiority, authority, pre-
retivin.ce, or privilege, spirial or ecelesisatical, within this
realm.
By the latter clause it is enacted:
That such juriedictioes, privileges, superioritise, or per
eminences, spiritual or ecclesiaatiesl, as by any spiritual or
icalesiesticsl power or authority bath heretofore been, or
may lewiulty be, exercised or need for the visi•ation of the
*Molise. ice state and peewee. and for reformstioa' order,
and correction of the same, and of all manner of errors,
heresies, schism', abuses, offences, untempts, and enormi-
ties, shall for ever be united and annexed to the crown of
these reams.
These words give plenary authority to the crown of
England not only in at lestuatical, but also in spit it oaf
things ; they confer, in fact, a spiritual u well es a
temporal and ecclesiastical supremacy. Mr. MOTET
states this doctrine with great clearness in the follow•
ing passage, and shows how, as far as the spiritual
supremacy is concerned, the effect of recent legisla-
tion has been to exempt Roman catholios and other
nonconformists from its influence, while it has left the
established church still subject to it:

Notwithstanding the endeavours of some recent writers to
disprove the Quesat's spiritual supremacy oen the established
church of this country, undoubtedly the law ascribes it to her
Majesty. Bat over the Roman catholic church, and the
other nonconformist denominations crating in this countet ,
no spiritual supremacy whatsoever belongs to the sovereign.
The Toleraton and Relief Acts, pulled at various times since
the revolution of 1688, bare secured to every denomination
of nonconformists the amplest liberty of conscienc., by re-
pealing es suspending in their favour the acts of parliament
which, having created the royal supremacy over the esta-
blished church, made ecclesiastical nonconformity an offence
against the person of the sovereign.
As far, therefore, u the " spiritual headship" of her
Majesty in matters of doctrine and discipline is con-
cerned, there can be no doubt that Roman catholics
are net seed upon to acknowledge it ; but with re-
gard to the ecclesiutioal supremacy, understanding
thereby the QuEves authority in ecclesiastical courts
and over ecclesiastical causes, there can be as little
doubt, and in fact Mr. ANBTEY freely acknowledges
that Roman catbelice are as much bound by it as any
other of the lieges. There is nothing to complain of
in the Istkivrfar statemeut of the law :
I, piessiillietblled
the
se law of Rased intorares
not, bet true genies so ponied, sad Use judge to
determine, without snaleetaden. It is otherwise with MOM
when temporal risks' el Os subjects of this crown ere in
eseneversy. The sempeal warts of the Qum have the
oils ssinimeno of seal muss, and them who draw them
aia id dincmcm am
IF of a high contempt and win
Hewer spirit the herself, for which heavy pensi-
on hue Mss enacted statutes, from time to tins passed
anasome of the sewn= law. In this mess the Queen
lian ban said to pommel, cot indeed an ecoludestisal sane-
oser, bat a supremacy as ell noses, whether eselosimenal or
eM All the seen of the kingdom derive their authority
from the mown itself, which bath no superior; the laws by
which they are governed en called the Queen'. laws ; and
the justice which is them administered is called the Queen's
justice. It is true, as the sane authorities show, that these
nuns are not all governed by the sane laws and toms of
practice. Bat this affords the reason of thsir haviog sash its
ewe peculiar jurisdiction, sad of being conlined to that.
The laws are not the lese, on that account, the Quo's'.
laws, nor the courts which follow the.. the Queen's cures.
The only point to notice here is the rejection of the
Mem " ecclesiastical enpremacy:" We think it should
be retained : it is perfectly intelligible as distio-
geished from " spiritual sepremacy," and in fact the
short statement of the whole law u to Roman
satholics is that, though freed from the recognition of
the QUEEN'S spiritual supremacy, they are as much
as ever bound to uphold her ecclesiastical supremacy.
Upon the question, how fez the new discipline pro-
mulgated by the Holy See is a violation of the
OMEN'S ecclesiastical supremacy, as the law now
stands' Mr. Azarrev writes with brevity and caution.
The substance of his opinion shortly is, that while no
existing law has been infringed by the appointment
of archbishop, bishops, and a cardinal, it may be
doubted whether the extent of eoclesiutical juriadio-
Con conferred by the late Letters Apostolical may net
contravene the principles of the Act of Supremacy.
• " The Queen's Supremacy enteldered in its /tendon
with the Boman Catholic Chunk in England. By Themes
Chisholm Annoy, Seq., ILP., Banister-at-Law." Owns
and Norton.