The Express.
London, England, 1850-12-16 00:00:00

your lordship bolds. We have observed with surprise and
alarm that the court of Rome hes recently issued a decree
assuming to divide this country into dioceses, to be presided
over by We
having territorial jurisdictioe within their
limits. We desire fully to admit no priecdple of religiose
toleration, and have no wish to question the right or the pro-
priety of any airangements which the chant of Roots may
think ht to make fur the regulation of her discipline among
her own members, 800 we are unable to look at the m, awes
in question in this light. The terms in which it has been
issued by the authorities and announced by the organs of
that church, appear to as incompatible with any other inten-
tion than that of an invasion of the eonstitutional supremacy
of the crown, the rights it the church of E- gland, and the
lawful authority of hie prelates. Recognisieg as we do the
authority of the Bennett church within this country, and of
your lordship as one of her bishops within this diocese, we
feel plaid upon at each a moment as this to assure your lord-
ship of We sincerity and cordiality with which we entertain
these feelings, and of oar resolution to maintain, in so far as
may lie within our province, the integrity of this church and
people from the intrusion of foreign domination and the
perils of ri lignites error and corruption."
His lord-hip, in continuation, said that he attached im-
portance not only to the address, but to the terms of the
address, and the meaning which the words might convey.
To the mere measure of appointing Roman catholic bishops,
and amignining to them titles taken from the names of
towns iu this country, he had no objection whatever; lu
foci, he thought it an unworthy thing to make so much
noise about mere names ,• but at the sanity time he was not
so ignorant is [eatery or life as not to know that although
there might be no objection ho names, that there might
be something in words ;of more impaction* ; in shot:,
be looked at the meteor, as a wide, and to the lan-
guage and mode of introducing ie. The reserip: of the
Pope spi-ke throughout of a power to be conferred on the
bishops, and this certainly seemed to point to something
beyond the mere spiritual Afars. (Hear.) For instance,
Cardinal Wiseman said that the greatest blessing is sob ut
to be conferred on our country by toe restoration of the
ancient Roman catholic !anarchical government. That sort
of expression in itself spoke a great deal, and it was the
motive Sll^l purpose to which he was di•ti ae.d to pay nitre
a:teation than anything else. Now, as an English churchman
be could do no other than view this in-ware se acid. unties! ;
but in stating that he was not ripened to ay that the aggres-
sion, as it was Gilled, should b. dalt with any further to a
' by mere words. (Marks of disapprontiou.) In teat abie and as
he (Lord Lyttelton) thought most ',Amgen rable appeal mode
by Cardinal Wiseman (for that it was a most skilful production
throughout could not be chnied,) he observed the old
Demeethenean prairie*, that of patting all that was forcible
at the hesitant g and end, so as to begin and end by securing
the favourable tnipr, anon of the re .der. Now there were
11,010 paseaTes in the middle of this paper certainly of a
most striking character, and perhaps these had given rise to
the cry that whet had been done by the Roman Catholics had
te en done in an carentatins manner. This might be so, or
it might have been only a mere form of words that bad
been employed; but this much he wou'el ay, that he
should be very sorry to be hound by all that had been said
on the suhject or aoeinst Romeo catholies at that mating
or elsewhere ; and sato what should be done on the suhject,
why he thought that all that could be desired would be
answered by the general protest which had gone forth from
one end of the country to the other. (Cries of " No.") For
his own part he was decidedly opposed to, and would not
j la in soy new penal law against tee catholics ; he
could see no °Nature to tee Q seen and the legisla-
ture doing something exactly analogous to that which had
been done throughout the country on the subject ; in
feet that there should be a declaratory act setting lor:h that
what the Pope bad Acme elsould be considered null and void,
and as having so effect whatever ; provided the measure was
steno', d.clsratory he would support it, but he wtoeld
decidedly oppore may penal measure. As for the ides
of re couvertiog Engiar.d, it was the wiliest idea that ever
eater, d into re • tined 01 man. (Cheers.)
Colonel BLIND seconded the address.
Mr. J. O. CURTLER. deputy-chairman of qusrter
sessions, moved an addition to this address of similar Import
to that adopted Sr the Warwick county meeting. I: was
c indium:awry of the conduct of certain of the clergy, in
having introduced into the teachings and services of their
church, principles and practices resembling those of the
Church ~f Rome. It further besought the bishop to doom-
rage these practices. Yr. Curti r seed that it was by the
unfaithful teaching of a portion of our clergy that this papal
aggression had been brought elbow.
The Rev. JOHN PEARSON, of Buckley, seconded the
amendment He was more at peace (be said) with Roman
ca.holies out of the church than with Raman eatholics in
the church—the teeter had dine all the mischief. (Cheers )
Lord LYITELTON, in reply, said—There are some
things in Tr. .C4101110:4111 of whin., I do approve, and others
of which I do net; but I errantly cannot consent to the
amendment
The 01011 SHERIFF then put the question: for the
addreoi, as moved by Lord Lyttelton, only three or four
hands were held up; with the addition moved by Mr.
Curlier it was carried by a very Inge majority.
Thanks were then voted to the Sheriff, and at 5 o'clock
the meeting te rmiasted.

THE BISHOP OF ST. DAVID'S AND THE AD-
DRESS OF THE ARCHBISHOP AHD BISHOP.
The Bishop of St David's has caused the publica-
tion of tho fullowisg letter, sd.ires‘ed by me (says hi•
lordship) to the Arehbi.hnp of Canterbury, which to pub
Hatted with hie grace's approbation ; and I have his permis-
sion to add that my letter having only reached him after 811
tie bishops, except the Bishop of Exeter, bad given their
Meat to the addre•e, be thought it ton lots to matte so great
on alteration as would hats been necessary to meet my ob-
lostion;

" Abergwili, Carmarthen, Nov. 26.
My dear Lord Aralibishop,-1 am sure that you will do
the justice to belisve that nothing short of a very deep
n of a paramount obligation would induce me to
take a step so repugnant to my feelings, especially at this
juncture, as the withholding my signature from the addle',
proposed by your grace. In its altered form, it is ter
tainly fres fr. m some of the objections which I urged
meant it before; but it WIC/ to me to have become
baste to others perhaps still graver. The reference to
the act of Elizabeth appears to me in every nape's
most anadvisable. My own opinion would have been
that the provision cited tram it has been virtually repealed
by the Roman Carbolic Relief Act. Bat at all events the
gestation seems to me is prove, it anything, far too much.
f.* dm, law of Elizabeth hes not been violatod for the first
time by the recent bull. It was equally set at 'di fiance' by
tie appointment of vicars apostolic, who have so lon en• r-
eimd star Inactions without complaint or molestation; and
it seems unreasonable to charge the Pope with' d •Iying ' a
law which has been so long permitted to shin p. But a still
ei.htier objection in my mind is, that those who refer in
sees a manner to the swum of Elisabeth must be consi
d rod as ea, ressirg a wish to see it gain put in force,
which it seems to me would involve the rep al of the Relief
Are. I cannot consent to make meetl responsible for las-
ga go which, directly or indirectly, indicates ouch an ob-
ject; and I would ropecttully entreat your grace to
orms.der whether this part of the address does
not admit, if not require, such a construotios. There are
sense others with which, I must own, lam not satisfied. I
think i: is needlessly harsh, to say the least, to treat the
Pope.' anticipation of our return to his communion, which
he must consider as the freak st of all bloating' to us, as' an
unwarrantable And I am still 'hind that the con-
cluding petition, for protectisn to the labours of the clergy,
will be int, tweet, not without an appearance of justice, as
a wi-lt to see the It mum catholic proselytisers silt aced by act
of parliament. These last objectors', however, I might con-
sent to wave, in defer. 004 to )our grace's judgment, and for
the asks of unanimity. But that which relates to the act of
Elisabeth appears ti me to involve principles which I may
not saute a to any other consideration.
" I rennin, my dear lord archbishop,
"Yours, very faithfully
"C. ST. DAVID'S.
" The Lori Archbishop of Cantetbury."