The Express.
London, England, 1850-04-26 00:00:00

THE EXPRESS, FRIDAY EVENING, APRIL 26, 1850.

sues regarding Ireland, he characterised as a paltry instal-
gamut of justice, and hoped that it would be rejected.
Mr. W. FAGAN said that the Encumbered Estates AM
kid been • great boon to Ireland, though it was accompanied
by eeMain incidents of injustice. He thought the present
approliksly to workved of i good Band declared that the people of Ire-
land t.
Mr.-EAILLIE thought the bill, as a financial measure,
ought to have been introduced and explained by the Chan-
cellor of the Exchequer. It was a means of converting Irish
land Into a cireulattng medium. He was anxious to know
how much of this medium was likely to come into eiroula
lion, haying himself estimated that about ten million, would
be forced into the market. He considered the bill as an
admission by government that the Encumbered Estates
Aet had failed, and he thought that our legislation was
sessing to confiscation, and, therefore, we need not be sur-
prised at repudiation doctrine being advocated elsewhere.
The SOLICITUXGENERAL contrasted the contradic-
tory objections made to the measure, and contended that
most of them were founded upon downright *onto
as to its provislen. In reply to Lord Naas, he denied that
the effect of the hill was to encumber property over again,
but said that on the contrary the mode of borrowing under
this act was infinitely better than the only mean. of borrow-
ing which could exist without it. Incidentally defending
the Encumbered Estates Act, he *Lowed from documents
that certain complaints, made in the course of the debate
of its having worked in specified instanees disadvantageously,
were unfounded, for although many encumbrancer+ had suf.
fered, they would but for the act have only shared a cnna
won and inevitable ruin. He disputed the financial doc-
trines of Mr. Bairn., &meeting that the present bill could
have no effect upon the currency of the country. If the
bid did not raise the price of land in Ireland, it would
simply be inoperative, and could do no barn. As r. carded its
wot king injury to proprietors, he argued that on the con-
trary the influx of capital into Ireland would
greatly benefit them, and they would actually be
able to obtain loans on far more advantageous terms
than now, besides becoming shar'n in tho benefits
arising from the improved condition of the country. lie
believed that the measure would do good to Ireland, bat ad-
mitted that it might be improved in committee, where he
should be happy to listen to suggestions.
Mr. G. HAMILTON opposed the bill, contending that
it was intended not so much to eft et a change in the eon-
ditions as a change in tmente, and, in fact, that it wee the
result of an opimon government believed to exist in Ireland
Motile to the landed preprietors.
Mr. BADLEI it suppertcd the measure. He dcieribed the
Encumbered Estates Act as a mere mw eon of c erryiog out
the decrees of the equity courts, which tied themselves been
unable to sell on amount of the complication of titles. He
praised the present measure, as likely to afford the industrial
classes iu Ireland a safe, simple, and solid security for their
hard-earned savings.
The O'GORMAN MAHON testified to a general feeling
in Ireland in favour of tt e bill.

Mr. H. HERBERT, wit► great reluctance, opposed this
bill, though all the measures preri-ualy introduced by
government, in regard to 'reload, had received his cordial
em port.
Major BLACK ALL supported the bill, bells ring that It
would benefit the Irish lao.!owners.
Mr. OROOAN °pinned it, and deelsred that its tendency
was to throw that elms into additional esuburasavisent.
Mr. STUART WORTLEY cauldered the b:11 a 'secre-
tary supplement to the Bulimia-red Estates Act, and a
corrective of the prob►ble mischief of that measure. He
thought that the bill, by laming addi,ional facility to raising
money, would produce a easpetition Machete! to Ilia'
interested in the preservation of the high min" of laud.
C DUNNE oppos.il the bill, amid,' g•ncral lurks
of impatience. 'Otte which
The house thin divided—
For the amendment
Astainst i•
The bill wu then read a second time.

Colonel DUNNE g..ve notice that, upon the notion for
goiog into c mmitrcb, h.- would move an i..strucsion to the
committee to grant tha same powers to ownets as it was
pru3sed to clot, r open purchasers.
The bill was then ordered m he emmitted on blond.iy.

itself most impossible. Suicide is their constant law
and practice; and if the whip survive at all, it Is
that they obeyed this law with less headlong zeal than
their rivals. If they had • successor, not a fool, a
madman, or an impracticable, they would go out to-
morrow.
But of all men Sir Itonzzr PEEL has the fewest
qualities of an heir presumptive. And it was no
doubt to tell the QUEEN this that he took four mortal
hours; for age is garrulous. Her MAJESTY might have
learned it in less time by visiting her faithful
Commons, or peeping at it through the apertures al-
lowed to female eyes. To Lave (*at her eyes on
Sir ROBERT in his seat in the house would at once
have told his tale.

There the old victor of a hundred nights sits almost
companionless, oe stinted to the des.i:ate dulness of
such society as history will forget to name. Occupa-
tion, to all appearance, he has none, save to watch the
ebbing and the reflux of the tide that bears no news
to him of restoration or escape. Sir Roemer is
where he is because he would in other days share his
power with none. Ito sympathi.ed with no man—
traced no man. Therefore have all men fallen away
from him of those who long hung upon his nod.
IVhat is still more remarkable is, that he appears
' to h►ve shrunk of late from claiming even the formal
deference due to his former position. Ho no longer
talks in kingly style. He seldom speaks at all, and
never with the condescending and didactic air that
once seemed to be his second nature. He is grown
chary of his reputation, and hardly ever ventures now
to hazard any opinion, that has not already won the
clear and undoubted went of the majority of his
hearers. Last session his volunteered scheme of a
remedial policy for Ireland was received with more
of wonderment than acceptarce ; and so far as the
present session has gone, the world has heard no-
thing of it further. It has been consigned tto the
tomb where ro many other splendid impracticabilities
have been laid: and we shall probably never hear cf
it 'waist.

The only section cf politicians who pay Sir ROntliT
that grateful deference which is accorded to those
who have a continuance of good service to render—
are the whigs. Ile has been to them, it must be
owned, a steady and considerate friend ever since
they came into office. He has been 1
To their failines very iilii.d;
To their virtues very kind;
he has rendered them innumerable services, and, as
for as the public are capable of judging, without
exacting any species of recompense or cunitideration
in return. We have no doubt that there is nothing
' the whirrs would not readily do to please and pro-
pitiate their potent ally—eau pt follow him. 7710
is against their religion. They believe in th ,msrlves
as a set or sect, and in no (Alter what•oever. Out of that
circle they have seldom gone to set k for aid or help—
never to loic for a leader. Tun ism is unacrupulous,
but not exclusive. Whig_i ry is exclusive as a
mater of faith. It is the doctrine, and they are the
ihetr.naires. No man understands this Lett, r then
the shrewd and wily ex-premier ; and nothing, we
believe, is more foreign to his ti.uughts than the nit a
of supplanting a whip chid in the lead of a wh:g
porty. Whatever other dreams and visions Vie mem-
ber for Tumworth may have revolved in his unde-
monstrative mind, this assuredly has never been one.

Ai was anticipated, the Court of Qeeen's Bench
has refu-ecl the Bishop of EXETER even a rule nisi
for a p.oi,ihitioa against the leceleeiastiesl Court in
the Comte case; and that unanimously. By this
refusal the highest ecmmon law tribunal of the king-
dim has left the intemperate prelate only this alter-
native : submission to, or rebellion against, tie law of
the lard ; and it else has decided that Convocation,
which it was the bishop's object in moving fee the
rule to enforce the revival f, has ne appellate jun.-
'
diction in the ecelesiasticel causes i f Englard.
IVhether under two such rebuffs as Dr. PeiLLierers
has now received he will descend to such tranquillity
of mind and such decency of behaviour as bells a
clergyman in his situation, remains to be st en. But
if, after due time and opportuniy shall have been
allowed him for recovering his temper and equa-
nimity, he shall still persevere in that course of turbu-
lence and disorder which he has recently indulged
himself in, and disgusted the c7untry with, it will
then most assuredly become the duty of the temporal
Head of the Cnurch and of her MAJESTY'S stivis-rs to
consider whether the law of England still contains
provisions for episcopal deprivation.
Are too, might hare been anticipated, the Rev. W.
°tame has replied to the Bishop of EXETER', letter
to the Primate; replied in a way which not only ex-
hausts the subject, but exposes an amount of positive
ignorance, of logical unscrupelousnese, of bad faith,
of downright mis-statements, and of sanctimoni-
ous hypocrisy on Dr. Poi !Axon part, that will
astound even those who knew him best, and put to
dismay those least acquainted with Lii craft and his
tricks. Mr. Coolies pamphlet is a piece of the
biped order of polemical dieeu-sion ; it may safely
be pieced on the shelf containing BENTLEY'S exposure
of Peeteris'Epiq/es, PETER BAYLES' tract on Comets,
and Bishop BERKELEY'S essay on Tar Triter: all
muter-strokes of controversial genius.
Yet, though thus fully recognising the merits and
completeness of Mr. GoooE's pamphlet; and whilst
admitting his right to be heard on this question—a
right ar;e:ng out of his great services to l'rotestant
truth front the very origin of the Tractarian contro-
versy, from the rut and varied learning which he so
abundantly supplied to the legal discussion of the
GORHAM case, and from the marked manner in which
the present Primate has endeavoured to compensate
him for the long neglect he experienced from
Bishop BLOM' lUD, his own diocieran—still we do
nut propose to enter into any examination of his
reply. Arid for two reasons; first, that to do it
justice it must be read ; secondly, that the necessity
for pursuing this controversy is becoming daily less
and less.

To the burst of bigotry which followed the
decision of the Privy Council, and which re-howled
louder than before on the appearance of Bishop
Piiittrorrs letter, there has clearly been no general
response by the church laity. So, if the discussion
have to be still further prolonged, it mud rage bt tween
the more txcited ecclesiastical partisans on either side,
and will duet nd into& mere professional and scholastic
squabble; producing only contempt and disgust and
alienation amongst those who yet remain iu the
church for higher and better purposes than to hear
priestly wrarg:ing on points either so plain as to
need bat the application of a little common sense for
their solution, or so obscure u to set at defiance
the subtlety of human intellect. This want of lay
response has not been lost on some of the wiser, or
the more worldly, of the high church leaders, such
SS Dr. HOOK and Archdeacon I [.tae; for from th3m
we have letters and pamphlets of peace and of pru-
dence; they either retreat or slink away from ie.
Pitittrorrs' intemperate turbulence. Ma is it to b.,
overlooked that the low church party is enjoying its
victory with moderation. Thankful for being them-
selves allowed to remain in the church, they ex-
hibit no:desire t) turn their opponents out of doors;
and rather than augment, by any movement of theirs,
the scandalcreated by Bishop PIIILLPOTTs, they have
considerately abstained from testifying to the Prineite
how highly they esteem him personally, and how
grateful they are tor the narrow escape they have had.
This line of conduct is so very creditable to the party,
as to induce a hope that such discretion will hem after
become part of their permanent policy, and thereby
save us from three sad Exeter Hall scenes which give
the high church sectaries such advantages over them.
It is, indeed, more apparent than over, that between
these two contending parties in the church, there lies a
great majority both of the clergy and the laity ; that
this majority will not permit either sect to disturb
its peace with impunity ; that it is much more in-
tereste i d n the practical questions, than in the pole-
mical discussions of the age ; and that it aims at the
education mid Christianity of the people, by every
possible means and agency, rather than the limitation
of church immunities by depriving the Establishment
of that comprehension which has hitherto been its
chief eharacteris'ic.

And it is, moreover, remarkable that now, when
the storm has somewhat abated, it is two bishops of
the church who are proposing again to let loose the
winds on society. The Hilltop of EXETER has just
applied to the Queen's Bench for the purpose, If he
had any purpose but mischief, of reviving Convoca-
tion. And tho Bishop of I.omiste is about, after
the example of TIIOMAB A BECKETT, to ask parlia-
ment to establish a spiritual court comeed either
entirely, or principally. of ecclesiastics in England for
the adjudication of such quendons of property u in-
volve matters of doctrine or of religious liberty
within the articles and ritual of the Church.

It is difficult to say which of these prelates is, in
his own peculiar and characteristic way, doing the
Church greater dis-service. Bat of the two, the Bishop
of LONDON has, probably, somewhat the advantage in
that respect. For the Bishop of Exrren, in his
audacity and rage, aims at the impossible; whilet Dr.
BLOMPIELD, in his astuteness, has in view what is
just possible. The restoration of the lleptarchy is
almost as likely an occurrence as the revival of Con-
vocation. But there are people' even in parliament,
who would gladly see a sort of high church inqui-
sition established in Doctors' Commons. Bishop
BLOMFIELLeB movements at present require, therefore,
• little attention.

It has been remarked by Bishop WIaEMAN (in a
sermon the high church party would do well to pon-
der one., and which that curiosity of humanity, Mr.
HENRY DRUMMOND, has, we see, undertaken to
answer on their behalf) that the objection now made
hy that party to the Judicial Committee of the Privy
Council comes too late. As a matter of reason-
ing this is undoubtedly so. What WEB assmted to by
their silence when enacted, they have no right to
'object to now that it does nut fe:ve their turn. But the
period at which the objection is taken is invaluable;
for it marks the object for which the change in the
composition of the court is now sought. Had the Ju-
dicial Committee, by its judgment, excluded from and
driven out of the church all who dishelievt d in the
Itomish view of baptismal efficacy, Bishop BLost-
FIELD would have been satisfied with that court;
but as its decision leaves them in the church, ho wishes
to establish a tribunal which will deatroy the prin-
ciple and the pramice cf comprehension. Now, the
only sure and mrtain mode of preserving that prin-
ciple and of continuing that practice is to perpetuate
the lay character of the court having cognisance of
such cases as Mr. 001111AM's.

But there is a peculiar inconsistency in Dr. Bumf-
vim., of all men and of rill 'Lehr)" mekiog
any such proposition. For, on turn ng to the
report of the commission on the ecclesiastical
courts, made in 1532, there will be found the recom-
mendation on which the appellate powers of the
Court of Delegates were transferred to the l'rivy
Council ; and that report timers not only the signatures
cf the late Archbishop of CANTERBURY and the late
11:shops of Deerfam and ST. AsA PH ; but also the sig-
nature of the present Bishop of Louisa. Tele trans-
fer was, therefure, made not men ly on the recom-
mendation of tke heeds of the church generally, but
on the recommendation of Dr. BWMFIELD especiall.
And in the debates which took place in tie
Lords on the passege of the bill tusking the
transfer, not one word of opposition was uttered
by a single prelate. The only hostility abown to it
came from the Marquis of WESTMEATH, who was sp-
prebeneive—not that the lumeer wou:d prove in-
jurLus to the Church, but that—the change would
prejudice him in some legal equ.bhles in which as
was engaged with the lady who had the misfortune
to be hie wife. With what consietency, then, can Dr.
BLOMFIELD now ask parliament to repeal a statute
which in 1832 w.., parsed on Lis own suggestion ?
In hearing such cases as Mr. GORHAM'S the Prisy
Council now has the aid of episcopal advice. Wnat
more can the church fairly require? The Primate of
the Church and the M. tropulitan of York have given
their avant and ssnctim to the judgment in that
ease. What higher authority can the Church reason-
ably claim? 11 it be not satisfied with the opinion
of its two heads, what could give it eatinfaction ? A
PIIILLPOTTS or a BLONIFIELD ? Perhaps e o. But that
is just the sort of satisfaction which neither the reli-
gions liberties nor the political freedom of the Eng-
h-h people can afford to give it.
\o; the Church must be content to t.st in the
position which it now occupies. Any attempt to re-
lease itself from the hold the State has over it will
shake it to the c• ntre. And if the question be by
its folly reduced to its continuance freed from Erns-
tiahismohat is a question the country will sooner
or later settle by its destruction.