The Sun.
London, England, 1852-04-22 00:00:00

i;.yl
N 1. N

A P

t Mr. Bennett to the bens fice of Sr. Paul's, Kuigh echr Hge.
The
consequences of that iestitu•ion were then those
epi-
nions and uoatrines of which the Biehop had timely w
rug were spread and propagated by Mr. Bennett and his
curet" at the m ,at iefleential end powerful ['UriSti of
step by step Ma. Bennett Deo...ewes! in
the practices and teaching of whet. he would call the
church universal, but of what we know to be that eene-
mullion of Rome from which the people and Centel' of
Euglsnd separated three centuriee age, eetselothing, as
every nation or body in a merlon has a to, a
Church of its own;—that mamma tic iesti•utior were in-
troduced into Beleravia, carrying (as iu miss Law's
cas) dismay told bitter grief into the besorn of femilies;
—that it church, St. Barnabas, was erec,ed to cele-
brate and extend terse successes;—that so papisticel
were its services that a mob rose against it;—and that
the Bishop of London, yielding to the it fluerme of po-
pular tumults, compelled Mr. Bennett, in 1850, atter
seven years' endurance of his unfaithfulnees, to
resign all his preferments in the diocese of
London. Meanwhile Mr. Bennett had printed form.,
of prayers, published books, and issued sermons, in
which he defended all his acts and opinious; jostle
fying auricular confession, intercession to saints, the au-
thority of the Church so•eelled universal over humen
conscience, repudiating and abjuring Protestantism, and
denying that Christianity could be propagated merely
by the agency of the Holy Scriptures. The universe'
feeling of eoeiety_ uncorrupted by such teaching—was,
on Mr. Bennett's resignation, thankfulness for having,
however lately or discreditably, got rid of him. his
friends subscribed money for him and he went abroad.
He appears to have rested chiefly in Roman Catholic
countries; at Kissingen, in Bavaria, and at Rome. What
he did at the latter is not known; but at Kissingen ho
daily attended mass, and consorted with friars aed priests.
In doing so he only vetted on the rule laid down by Dr.
Phillpotts at the Synod of Exeter, and published to the
world in its acre, via., that in countries where
there is a branch of " the Church Catholic,"
however erring and corrupt, there only can a Chris
tian worship;—a strict logical deduction from the
premise that there is on earth a Church univer-
sal, having a sacrificial and mediatorial priesthood.
Amongst the persons of eminence and power perverted
and led away by Mr. Bninett's system was the patroness
of Frome Solweoti; and that benefice becoming va
cant, she, au amiable and excellent but most deluded
woman, presented Mr. Bennett to the Bishop cf the
diocese, that he, as Ordinary, might institute Mr. Ben-
nett thereto. The parishioners remonstrated; but her
reply was, that the act was by her irrevocable. They
turned to the Bishop for protection; ho listened at first
to their complaints; but they persisting in their otj(c-
Liens, he instituted Mr. Bennett and closed all correspon-
dence with them. The first remark in this state of facts
relates to the conduct of the Bishop. In England alone,
of countries possessing an established church of the
Protestant communion, the parishioners have no Toles, in,
or veto on, the appointment of their minister. And the
reason assigned why they have not such a power is,
that it has been reposed in their bishops to
be exercised by those officers of the church on their
behalf. In the constitution of the Engish Church,
the bishops are interposed between the full exercise
of the right of patronage by its owner and the people
effected by the exercise. The power of the patron is,
therefore, a qualified one; the bishop for sufficient rea-
sons can defeat its exercise; and those reasons are to be
grounded by the bishop on his regard for the cure of the
parishioners' souls, in conformity with the article?, for-
mularies, and teaching of the EstubLelied Church. It
results then from these premee s, that in the Bishop of
Bath and Wells the Church has a prelate who regards
the Humanist outcast of the diocese of London, the man
who there held and taught all Roman doctrine, and the
traveller who subs:, queutly worshipped daily at Kis-
singen in a mass house, as a proper incumbent of
Frome. The theory of bishops protecting the parish--
toners against an improper exercise of patronage does
not, it is clear, work hare. And what is really the ma
question in the whole case. Ought parishioners in the
nineteenth century—when it is notorious the episcopate
entertain generally pretensions winch the laityas a body
repudiate and reject—to have no further pArontdsettiohne
than their Ordinary's weakness or firmness.
value of a public inquiry into the Frome case, as pro-
posed by Mr. Horsman, would have been inestimsble, as
throwing light on the manner in which episcopal
control colludes with the power of patronage to force on
- •
parishes ministers against whom the soundest objections
exist. For the other circumstances connected with Mr.
Bennett's institution prove that the forms, certificates,
and requirements of the thirty-eight and forty-ninth
Canons (to which we long ago directed attention, as
bearing on this case), afford very slender protection to
parishioners in the present state of the Church. Mr.
Bennett, though drummed out of the diocese of London,
was at once able to get a certificate of three of its bene-
ficed clergy that he was a faithful minister of the Church;
and this certificate the Bishop of London, who had forced
him out of his diocese, so indorsed as enabled the Bishop
of Bath and Wells to deem that those canons had been
complied with. Hence it is apparent, that where two
bishops are willing, nothing is easier than to elude the
protection intended to be given to the laity by those two
canons. What, therefore, is wanted are either some
means-of restricting episcopal authority in this respect, or
of repOsing some power of self-protection in parishioners
themselves. Secretary Sir John Pckington stated
-(without showing) that in this matter the Bishop of Lon-
don's conduct had been blameless; and Mr. Herman
said the report was that the Bishop had endorsed the
certificate of his three beneficed clergy that Mr. Bennett
had, during the last three years he was in the diocese,
been a faithful minister of the Church, to the effect that
their signatures were genuine only. But the practice
under the 49th Canon, is for a bishop to require of his
presentee a bcue deceisit of his last ordinary. Did Mr.
Bennett carry to Wells such a docUment from Fulham?
And if not, why did Dr. Begot, in this case, where the
parishioners had remonstrated, dispense with that docu-
ment? There is, in the discussion, a hiatus here, which
Dr. Blomfield ought, in mercy to his own reputation, to
supply. Nothing in Mr. Horsman's speech was more
admirable than its comprehensive spirit; he never once
infringed on the principles of toleration. The Church has
always been accustomed to boast of her comprehensive
action; and it used to be said of her, that she had a Cal-
vinistic creed and an Arminian clergy. But those very
words indicate the circle of her comprehension: it has li-
mits; and the complaint against Mr. Bennett is not merely
that he exceeded, but that, in exceeding, he attempted
wholly to destroy those limits. High church men and
low church meta, the church can well entertain; and it
will be an evil day for the Establishment when it is ex-
clusively possessed by any one of the several sects that
now find a home in its folds. But resting within those
bounds, all its members must respect the tenure of its
existence; recognise the Parliamentary action which
gave it birth; admit the power of the Legislature to
withdraw what it has given. They must not, protected
in the Church, by the State's authority, conspire to over-
throw the power of the State, and to elevate the Church
to a position independent of, if not co-equal in its own
sphere with, the State; they must not propound views of
a priesthood otherwise than the Church has provided,
functionary only, not mediatorial; and they must not,
as the Bishops did in this case, stand aloof, as if the
House of Commons were acting ultra pires in prOuming
to inquire into the ecclesiastical grievances of the people.
For therein the limits of comprehension will haye beeu
passed, and those of priestly aggression have been en-
tered on.

LYNCH LAW IN CHELSEA.
During yesterday and the two pr.-ceding diys, great
exciwmeiit has prevailed in the neiehbAirhoatot Chel-
sea ead Beompton, in consequence of a series of outr2;4ee
baying built commit ed by is mob of persona, to the
number of several hunireds, wralch have resulted in a
cun;id table destraciton cf property. It appears that
few days ago a report was circulated that a wol.nae
seamed Sa ah Cur, living in Greerestrert, Martha-
; rough-road, had put her child, a little girl eight years
old, upon the fire, and burnt her to cleat. This state-
ment was generally believed, as it was knoan in the
neighbourhood that the child had for a lengtheeed period
been id• treated by her mother, who, in addition to
b 1-rtilig her, is said to have locked her up in a room
for fitteen or sixteen hours in the coldest days
of winter, without either food or fire. An irquest
was held on the body, at which the enedicaLevi-
dence was to the effect that the child died from the
effects of fire, but as it origin could not be ascertained
the jury returned an open verdict. This did not satisfy
the neighbours, who seem to have been convinced that
the mother was guilty of murdering the child, and
therefore they determined to take the law iato their own
hlnds. The funeral was arranged to take place ut St.
Luke's Cirurots on Monday afternoon. At the hour ap-
Painted foe the procession to kayo , the house, many
hundreds of persons assembled round it, who vowed they
would tear the woman to pieces if they could lay hands
upon her. A messenger was secretly sent to the police
station, and a number of constables arrived at the house.
the procession left the house, and immediately the
crowd, which had greatly increased in fury, set up a
frightful snrieking and hooting, following up that show
of their ',nibs-nation by hurling showers of large stones,
mud, and filth at the mother wish rrent violence. Se-
veral of the stones struck her in the face and on the
bead, and her clothes were covered with mud. The mob
who followed the coffin all the way to the churchyard,
hooting, shrieking, and throwing stones like so man):
mad people, endeavoured several times to seize her,
aid
had it not been for ten or twelve policemen who sur-
rounded her, she would mast certaruly have been seri-
ously injured. The officers urged the mob to allow the
coffin to be taken quietly to the grave, but they refused
to listen. At length, after considerable difficulty, the
churchyard was reached, and there the teen° was one
of a fearful description. The mob now amounted ro up-
wards of a thousand persons, all of whom were shout-
ing and throwing stones, and the uproar became so
great that not a word of the burial service could be heard.
The clergyman had at last to desist, and tralto the hest
of his way from the spot. The mob then again endea-
voured to get possession of the woman; and had it not
been for the most strenuous exertions of the police, she
would have been trampled to death. The return from
the church was of a more uproarious character; but the
woman, under the protection of the police, marl:aged to
get into her house, and the doors were fastened. The
mob then took up a position in front, where they re-
mained until a late hour, thinking the woman would
make her appearance. During the night she and her
friends m'de their escape from the house, alter having
packed up all their goods and filled a waggon with !hem,
which they hod managed to persuade a carman in the
neighbourhood to bring. The goods were taken with
the waggon to a stable for the reel of the night, in or-
der that they might be conveyed away in the morning.
Before, however, that was done the mob again assembled,
and hearing that the woman had ft- d, their rage knew no
bounds. Being told that the goods were in the neigh-
bourhood, they determined upon finding and destroying
them. The waggon was met in the street, said the work
of des,truetion commenced. Mahogany tables, drawers,
and bedsteads were broken into a thousand pieces; beds
cut open and feathers and flacks thrown into the road;
china and lonkingaglasses smashed, and every article
destroyed. Toe police interfered, but the crowd at this
(nearly twelve o'clock on Tuesday nigh') was upwards
of five thousand persons, and their efforts were un-
availing. The mob then again repaired to the house,
thinking the woman was in the neighbourhood. They
remained there nearly all night and began again to as•
semble yesterday morning, and to increase during the
day; and last night a large mob was endeavouring to find
the object of (heir hatred, whom they vowed they would
murder it she was to be found.

PRICES OF WHEAT, FLOUR, AND

BREAD, IN LONDON AND PARIS.
Annex 4d is a comparison of the present prices of
wheat, fl )nr, and breal, in London and Paris:—

The highest price of wheat of the first quality in Paris
is 29g. per q hectolitre, which is equal to 445. 3d. per
quarter; and the highest price of white wheat of the first
quality in London being 48s. per quartrr, it fellows that
wheat is nearly 8i per cent. dearer in Loudon than in
Paris.

The highest quotation of flour of the first quality in
Paris is 35f. 15c. the 130 kilogrammes, which is equal to
355. 2d. per sack, of 2801 b. English; and the highest
quotation of flour in the London market being 40s. the
sack, it follows that /lour is about 133- per cent. dearer in
London than in Paris. The highest quotation of the
second quality of write flour in Paris is 32f. 50c., which
is equivalent to 325. 6d. per sack of 2801 b., and which,
as compared with the quotation in London of 303. for
household flour, shows that this description of flour
is nearly 8i per cent. dearer in Paris than in London.
The price of bread of the first quality in Paris is 31c.
per kilogramme, which is equal to about std. the 41b.
loaf, English weight; and the price of brew', in London
at the fuil-priced shops being 7d. per 41b., it follows that
bread is about 33i per cont. dearer in London than in
Paris. The second quality of bread is quoted at 24
cents. per kilogramme in Paris, which is equivalent to
nearly 4d. per 41b. loaf.