The Sun.
London, England, 1862-12-09 00:00:00

THE CHES7E.RFIELD MURDER

CHESTERFIELD, MONDAY.

This morning the two prisoners, Thos. Flannery
and John Ball, were brought up before the mayor
and a full bench of magistrates charged with wil-
fully murdering George Cooper on Monday night
last. Contrary to expectation the young woman
Aas again unable to attend, having been seized with
epileptic fits in conjunction with hysteria, and the
surgeon seated that it was utterly impossible for
her to give evidence, as she is speechless. This
being so the magistrates again remanded the pri-
soners,
not withstanding the objections urged by Mr.
A. Knowles, the solicitor for the defence. It is
stated that threats have been used against the young
woman Holt, and bribery also attempted to prevent
her giving evidence against the prisoners. Funds
for the defence of both men have been provided by
the Hibernian Society which has been established
in the town, Both prisoners pleaded their innocence.
The defence urged by them is an dila'. The case
will come on again on Friday next, or sooner if the
girl be sufficiently restored to give evidence. A
great body of Irish surrounded the Municipal Hall
during the examination of the prisoners.
Another serious riot took place on Saturday night
last between the Irish and the Protestants at about
twelve o'clock. After a hard fight the Irish were
compelled to retreat and take refuge in their houses,
and were closely followed by the indignant Eng-
lishmen, who smashed their windows in all direc-
tions. The English were principally colliers from
Staveley, where the deceased Cooper worked. The
row was repeated last night ; the Irish were soon
satisfied and left their opponents masters of the field.
The efforts of the police to restore order were quite
unavailing, as will be shown in the fact that one
Irishman took refuge in the passage of the police
office, and was closely followed by a party of
Englishmen and soundly thrashed in the very
precincts of the temple of justice.

LATV IN7ELLIGENCE, Dec. 8.

VICE-CHANCELLORS' COURT.
(Before Vice-Chancellor Sir It. T. Kindersley.)
THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL V. ETIIERIDGE.-THE

RAMSGATE BAPTIST CASE.

This morning the Vice-Chancellor gave judg
ment in this case, which has been for some weeks
before the Court, and has excited much interest
amongst the Baptist body throughout the country.
The relators and plaintiffs were Miss Mary Spencer,
Messrs. Thomas Hodgman, George Tyson, and
others, the defendants being Mr. B. C. Etheridge,
the minister of the chapel, Mr. Flint, and others,
the trustees. The question in dispute was the
right of the defendants to admit to holy commu-
nion and church membership persons who have
not been baptised when adults by immersion. It
appeared that in 1834 the Particular or Strict Bap-
tists, who hold that it is not lawful to admit to the
Lord's Supper any person who has not when an
adult been baptised by immersion, founded a chapel
in Ramsgate, which was called Beulah Chapel, and
in 1837 the Rev. Mortlock Daniel was appointed as
the minister. The congregation increasing, it was
determined in 1839 to sell Beulah Chapel and to
build a new one. This was done at a cost of some
£4,800, and it is alleged that a greater portion of
the money was contributed by the strict commu-
nionists, Miss Spencer alone giving £3,200.
The trust deed of the new chapel, which is
called Cavendish Chapel, and which was
erected in May, 1841, takes no cognisance of the
former chapel, and the trusts were, that the trustees
for the time being should, from time to time, and at
all times thereafter, permit the said chapel to be
used, occupied, and engaged as a place of public
religious worship and service of God, by the So-
ciety of Protestant Dissenters at Ramsgate, of the
denomination called Particular or Ca.vinistic Bap-
tists, and by such other persons as should thereafter
be united to the said society and admitted members
thereof, and should attend the worship of God in
the said chapel ; and should permit such person, of
the deno Lunation of Particular or Calvanisticßap-
fists, as two-thirds of the members of the said so-
ciety present at a meeting should from time to time
elect and choose to be their minister or pastor, to
preach and expound the Holy Scriptures, and other-
wise officiate in the said chapel according to the
usual order and customs of societies of Protestant
Dissenters of the denomination aforesaid. About
1840 Mr. Daniel, who had up to that time been a
strict Baptist, changed his opinion on that eubject,
and he proposed to admit to the Lord's Supper un-
baptised believers; but the great majority of the
church disapproving of that proposition it was aban-
doned, and the subscriptions for the new chapel, as
alleged by the plaintiffs, went on on the understand-
ing that the chapel was to belong to the Strict
Baptists. In 1844 Mr. Daniel again mooted the
subject of open communion, and proposed to the
church to admit "unbaptised" persons to the Lord's
Table. The effect of that proposition was at once
to induce Miss Spencer the relator, and some other
individuals, to request their dismission from the
church, and they were accordingly transferred to a
strict communion church at Broadstairs. This state
of things continued till 1846, when, in the month
of December, a resolution was unanimously passed
at a church meeting to the effect that the Lord's
Table be restricted to baptised believers. Mr.
Daniel resigned immediately after this, and the
church worshippers at Cavendish Chapel re-
mained without a pastor until December, 1847,
when Mr. Wills was elected to that office, and
continued to hold it till September, 1853. During
the whole of his pastorate the communion was
strict, and on the sth of May, 1848, a declaration
of faith was agreed to at a church meeting in which
they re-affirmed the principle of strict communion .
After the resignation of Mr. Wills, Mr. Etheridge
was elected the minister, and the practice of strict
communion was continued to December, 1859, when
Mr. Etheridge proposed a resolution at the church
meeting to open the communion to unbaptised be-
lievers. A vote by ballot was taken on this reso-
lution, and it was carried by a large majority, and
at a subsequent church meeting the resolution was
confirmed. After some endeavours on the part of
the strict communionists to induce Mr. Etheridge
to revert to the practice of strict communion, this
suit was instituted, and the plaintiffs by their bill
asked the Court to restrain the defendants by in-
junction from permitting the chapel to be used by
any other persons than Particular Baptists ; and
for a declaration that on the true construction of the
trust deed none but Particular Baptists were en-
titled to the benefit of the trusts or participation in
the Lord's Supper. The Vice-Chancellor went at
great length into a consideration of the confessions
published by sections of the Particular Baptists at
delegate meetings, from which he came to the con-
clusion that they had held strict communion to be
an essential or fundamental article of doctrine.
Reviewing the trust deeds of Cavendish Chapel, he
found that it was never the intention to restrict
the communion in the way desired by the plain-
tiffs, and he therefore dismissed the bill.