The Sun.
London, England, 1852-06-09 00:00:00

LONDON, WEDNESDAY

Battle and Robertsbridge Road.
Runcorn Improvement.
London Tilbury, and Southend Rillway.
Wedlineord, and Reading Road, and
Shillingford Bridge, without amendment.
Ipswich Dock, with an amendment.
South-Eastern and Reading, Guildford, and Reigate
Railways, with amendments.

PETITIONS.
Several petitions were presented against the grant to
Maynooth.
Mr. SCHOLEFIELD presented a petition from the
Society for obtaining the Repeal of the Taxes on Know-
ledge, praying for au inquiry with regard to the postage
charged for the transmission of newspapers under 2 oz.
Mr. G. SANDARS presented a petition from the
physicians and surgeons of Wakefield and its vicinity,
praying for more adequate remuneration in criminal
prosecutions.
Mr. ADDERLEY presented a petition from George, Cape
of Good Hope, with 200 signatures, chiefly field cornets,
praying for the speedy passage of their constitution ordi-
nances, with all their details as first drawn.
Mr. CUBITT presented a petition from the Southern
Association of Baptist Ministers and Messengers, assembled
at Whitchurch, Hants, representing 27 churches, 3,000 mem-
bers, and 12,000 hearers, against the Militia Bill.
Mr. COBDEN presented a petition from Saffron Walden
against the Militia Bill.
Sir B. HALL presented a petiton from the inhabitants of
the parishes of St. Marylebone and St. Pancras, agreed to in
public meeting assembled, complaining of Romish doctrines
and practices being permitted in the churches of the Esta-
blishment, and praying that an inquiry may be instituted
into the conduct of the Bishop of London, in reference to the
matters complained of.
Mr. BROCKMAN presented a petition from the members
of the Hythe Reading Society to be furnished with copies of
such of the reports and other Parliamentary documents
ordered by the House of Commons to be printed as refer to
literature, science, the fine arts, and the useful arts, free of
expense, Sec.
Mr. TUFNELL presented petitions from the Eastbourne
Literary and the Peterborough Mechanics' Institutions in
favour of a distribution of Parliamentary papers to all mecha-
nics' and literary institutions.
Mr. G. THOMPSO.N presented a petition from the Tower
Hamlets, praying an inquiry into the cause of the prohibi-
tion of meetings on the Sabbath-day in Bonner's. fields.
Mr. PACKE gave notice that he should move that the
County Elections Poll Bill be read a third time that day six
months.

no such statement. What he said was, that when Mr. Ben-
nett left London he went abroad to visit Rome, and that
it was believed he had gone there in more senses than
one. When he said that, he had had a passage in his mind
of the Rev. Mr. Bennett's let'er to the Bishop of London,
which he would now quote to the House. He said (talking
of his difficult position), " The end must be that I seek for
peace elsewhere." Now, he believed no person who read
that passage could put on it any other interpretation than
that by "elsewhere" Mr. Bennett meant the Church of
Rome. The term was stereotyped—it was the phrase of
those who had preceded Mr. Bennett where he (Mr. Hors-
man) supposed Mr. Bennett was going at the time, and it
was understood to be the usual expression of clergymen of
the Church of England in respect to that change.—(No, no.)
He could quote several clergyman who had gone over to
Rome who had used that phrase, and two occurred to him
at the moment—Mr. Wilberforce and Archdeacon Man-
ning.—(Hear, hear.) It had been represented that he had
founded his statements respecting the proceedings of Mr.
Bennett abroad on the evidence of one person, but, had he
believed the inquiry would not have been granted, he
would not have limited his evidence to one person. That
gentleman had been placed in a most awkward position, but,
in order to show the spirit in which he wrote, he would
quote a passage from his letter, which would show he had
very different feelings from those attributed to him. He
wrote as follows:
" The best evidence on this point, it seems to me, would
be that of the English chaplain, whose name I forget, but
who must be mentioned in the 'Clergy List,' or at any event
in Graville's Spas of Germany.' If any evidence to this
extent, which is all I can with truth aver, can be avail-
able in corroboration, I have no objection to give it; but
I should object most strongly to being brought forward
alone to prove a charge, which, if not better supported;
must fail. For, upon such evidence alone no bishop, still
authority, could condemn him. It is only from
a e less anyv fervent
zealgal
disgustat for
the
e
cause of the Gospel truth and an
hypocrisy of the man, that in any
intensel re
tevent I should like to bring charges, which, exclusive of
the compulsion of duty that would necessitate them, must
have the appearance of underhand observation. In fact, I
took no other notice of these parties than such as a person
exceedingly ill is forced to pay to those whose inconsiderate
noisiness is the source of constant annoyance to an invalid."
And again, a week after, he wrote:—
" I have thus stated the whole that I can conscientiously
testify on this point. Being then, as now, very ill, I should
Mr. Bennett at all but for the prominence
As it was no business of mine to be his
seemed to be comfortably on his way to St.
but very little attention, never thinking
i
emanism would require to be testified by
pcontefoet tn
censor,
h i
ke haveoiresr,ls,,y and
I peculiarities.t noticed
thattvt
hc
eeehi him
s m
any evidence of mine. To be obliged to give any evidence
at all against him is naturally very unpleasant to me, con-
sidering the manner in which my observations were made;
and if these observations are to be mode use of as the
groundwork of any overt proceedings against him, I must
beg that the promoters of such proceedings will first amply
substantiate my statements, which can be done with ease,
by obtaining,thetestimony of other residents (there were
about forty English there at the time) of the English chap-
lain, and any of the innumerable persons about the Roman
Catholic Church, who must have had daily opportunities of
witnessing his attendance. If this be done, and it can be
done with very little trouble or cost, I have not a doubt that
the result would be to prove indisputably, that while at Kis-
singen, at least, there being in the place an English church
and English service, he voluntarily attended by preference
the Roman Catholic."
After the speech which he (Mr. Horsman) delivered,
slr. Sniteer wrote a further letter, which would best
show what his feelings were, in which was the follow-
ing letter ;
"It seems to me that the simple course, if Mr. Bennett
deny what I believe on my honour to be undoubtedly true,
is to send to Kissingen, where conclusive evidence can be
easily got. There must be some 50 or 103 persons, at
the very least, who can say positively that they have seen
or not seen him at mass. I have already stated the amount
of evidence I can give. I have been dragged into this most
unpleasant business by the hasty letter of Mr. Pratt; but,
being in it, I feel bound to substantiate every syllable that
I have advanced, and with that view I should not only be
willing, but glad to pay the whole expenses of any person
who can go over to Kissingen and settle the whole. But it
seems to me, that the question could be much more easily
decided. Does Mr. Bennett deny the fact of his constant
attendance at the Roman Cathode service and his non-at-
tendance at the Church of England service at the same
place? If he does not, the whole question is at rest. tir
John Harrington was wilh him all the time; surely he
could not refuse, if solemnly called upon, to give his testi-
mony, however unfavourable it must be in its consequences
to his friend.'
The gentleman was not anxious to raise any accusation
against Mr. Bennett, but that having in conversations men-
tioned facts which were repeated without his authority, and
published, much to his annoyance, when asked if those
statements were true, he took the part a man of spirit ought
to take, and said he did not take any part in publishing the
facts, but that, as they were stated by him, he thought he
was bound in honour not to shrink from confirming what he
bad asserted.—(Hear, hear.) He had said so much because
it was due to the gentleman in question ; but he had other
testimony which he could have adduced, and he could have
stated many things which he had not wished then to bring
forward. He had seen a letter in the handwriting of a lady
from Germany, who said that the organist of the church (at
Kissingen) had pointed out a gentleman to her, and told
her it was Mr. Bennett, late of St. Paul's, Knightsbridge,
but now in communion with the Church of Rome.
Ile could have stated that Mr. Bennett's proceedings
and conduct had been notorious, and that he was pub-
lished in the Roman Catholic Directory as having been re-
ceived into the Church of Rome.—(oh, oh !) Though that
was a work of great circulation, it was not a work of autho-
rity; but be might have looked upon it as being of some
authority, because Dr. Wiseman had statedauring the agita-
tion on the Titles Bill, that if the Noble Lord had looked
into it he must have been aware of the Pope's intentions, as
he had been designated in the Directory as " Archbishop of
Westminster" some time previously. He held in his hand
the affidavit of a German servant, to the effect that it was a
matter of notoriety to all the servants in the hotel that Mr.
Bennett went to mass every morning, and he could also
have stated, on the former occasion when this subject was
More the House, that Mr. Bennett, when travelling with his
party, carried about in a box a consecrated stone for an
altar, and that this stone was set up when they halted; and,
Mr. Bennett officiating as a priest, performed religious ser-
vice before it. It was known that in the Roman Catholic
Church every Roman Catholic priest must carry about with
him a small consecrated stone for an altar, wherever he
went, but such a thing was unknown in the Protestant
Church. He would now state why he felt the evidence, on the
authority of Mr. Pratt and his letter, was the most proper
evidence that could have been adduced. It was a rule in this
House that where a charge was made against an individual,
the person bringing the charge should be extremely careful
as to the character of the evidence he adduced, particularly
that he should bring forward none which should be unfair to
the party accused ; and during the last five years, in all the
motions which he (Mr. Horsman) had made upon ecclesias-
tical subjects, he had invariably stated that the evidence
upon which he based his motions had been always published
evidence known to the world, and generally taken from re-
turns and reports laid upon the table of the House. So, in
this instance, setting aside the letter of Mr. Pratt, it was a
strong fact that Mr. Bennett's name should he published in
a work like the Roman Catholic Directory in the month
of November, and that it should remain unnoticed and un-
contradicted until the month of April. It might be said that
it was possible Mr. Bennett lied not seen that publication,
but even assuming that he had not, it was, at all events, a
strong fact that Mr. Pratt's letter should remain entirely un-
noticed, for he was in a position to show that this letter had
been brought under Mr. Bennett's attention. Before the insti-
tution of that gentleman it would be remembered that there
was a good deal of excitement at Frome, and when the in-
stitution took place, Mr. Hastings, one of the clergy of
Frome, addressed the following letter to Mr. Bennett. The
institution took place on the 24th of January, and this
letter was written on the 31st

" Rectory, Trowbridge, Jan. 31, 1852.
" Rev. Sir,—The enclosed letter (this was the letter of
Mr. Pratt) I have copied from the Achill Missionary Herald
of this month. You may not have the opportunity of seeing
the paper, and consequently be unable to reply to it. As a
brother clergyman and a near neighbour I have felt it to be
my duty to make you acquainted with the serious charge
brought publicly against you, and the scandal occasioned
thereby to the Church ; may I hope you will not think me
officious or obtrusive in calling ycur attention to the sub-
ject? Trusting to hear that there has been some mistake in
the statement,
I am, Rev. Sir, yours faithfully,
,‘Rev. WBennett. " J. D. HASTINGS."
Now, if Mr. Bennett had been a clergyman regarding whose
orthodoxy there was no actual doubt, but about whom re-
ports had originated owing to a continental residence, he
ought to have been thankful for such an opportunity of
contradicting that report; and certainly Mr. Bennett,
with his antecedents, ought to have felt himself bound to
answer it.—(Hear.) That letter, however, met with no
reply. Mr. Hastings waited until the 12th of February,
when he wrote this second letter :
" Rectory, Trowbridge, Feb. 12, 1.852.
" Rev. Sir,—On Saturday, the 31st of January, I addressed
a letter to you, directed Vicarage, Frome."lhe object of
that communication was to afford you an opportunity of see-
enclosed, and which has since appeared in several of the
pap ' John 0. N. Pratt,' a copy of which I
ers. This letter was naturally the subject
conversation among the clergy of the neighbour-
hoi see-
ing a
neighbour-
hood, Englishclandnte
elr
newspapers.
signedh
had hoped in writing to you to be enabled, on
your authority, to contradict the statements therein con-
tained. Your silence, however, so opposed to the courtesy
by which your conduct, as I am informed, is characterised,
compels me to conclude that it is not in your power to afford
the desired explanation. I regret this the more as it tends
to confirm those who were willing to pass over what had oc-
curred in your former parish in the adverse opinion they
tertained respecting your appointment to any office in the
the Church of Rome, which you have publicly
Church of England, inasmuch as your preference for the ser-
vices ofand
solemnly declared erroneous in her ceremonies and in mattersh
of faith, has thrown contempt upon that Church, faith
and doctrine in your ordination vows you promised to give
faithful diligence always' to minister and teach.
" I am, Reverend Sir, yours faithfully,
J. HAsneras.
That letter again received no answer whatever. What con-
clusion would any man draw from such silence?—(liear,
hear.) Mr. Hastinga drew his own conclusion, and this was
his letter to him (Mr. Horsman) on the subject:—
"Rectory, Trowbridge, April 24, 1852.
" My dear Sir,—Enclosed are copies of the letters pro-
mised; you arc at liberty to make what use you please of
them. I may observe,
my object in writing them was to
afford Mr. Bennett an opportunity of contradicting the
report of his attendance upon the Roman worship in
preference to that of the Anglican Church, particularly
as I was informed by a friend of his who had requested me
to call upon him that his views were very much changed.
It was the intention of myself and several of the clergy
around to have called upon him, had this statement proved
true. Just at this time Mr. O. N. Pratt's letter appeared,
and I thought it advisable at once to communicate with
Mr. Bennett on the subject. lam truly sorry, that by his
the statement, an 1,
hill
s
that had not changed i
taking no notice of either letter, he has left an impression on
my maid, as I have stated to him, that he could not refute.s
views, thus precluding myself and others from paying
that courtesy which belongs to a brother clergyman coming
into the neighbourhood.

"I am, my dear Sir, your very truly,
~
~ J. D. Ileswics.
Now, put aside altogether the evidence which he (Mr.
Horsman) gave the other day as to the conversations of Mr.
Bennett, and here was the fact that a letter was published
in, and went the round of all the newspapers,
licly that Mr. Bennett never entered the Protestant church
when at Kissinger)stating pub-
, but was a regular attendant at mass,
upon the mind of every
and that this le;ter WAS enclosed to Mr. Bennett by a. brother
clergyman in a friendly, kindly, and brotherly spirit, and
was true. —(l.lear, hear.) 11, (Mr. Iforsman) asked now
when it was known that no notice was taken of the commu-
nication, and no such explanation as that whish the circum-
stances required was given, the fact must leave a conviction
whether, if he impartial man that the statement
bauf had the choice of ever so much evidence