The Sun.
London, England, 1849-12-12 00:00:00

LAW INTELLIGENCE

JUDICIAL COMMITTEE OF THE PRIVY
COUNCIL, Dec. 11.

GORHAM V. THE 13131101' OF EXETER.
(Centinued from our Afternoon Edition of yesterday.)
Mr. TURNER continued to say, he had dealt with the
question as if their Lordships had to consider whether
Mr. Gorham's doctrine was the doctrine of the Church
of England. But that was not the question. The
question was, whether the doctrine of Mr. Gorham was
disaffirmed by the doctrine of the Church of England.
Unless they proved that the doctrines of Mr. Gorham
were opposed to the Articles of the Church of England,
their Lordships could not affirm the sentence of the
Court below. Those doctrines of the Church of England
were laid down at the dawn of the Reformation, when it
was necessary to embrace as many denominations of
Christians as possible. Article 6 said, " Holy Scripture
contained all that was necessary to a man's salvation."
Was not that a declaration that the framers of these
Articles meant that nothing was required as an article of
faith but what was contained in Scripture ? Article 20
said the Church had power to order rites and
ceremonies, yet it was not competent to decree
anything not contained in God's Wurd. The
frame of those articles was, that they contained
certain things as proved and as necessary to be believed,
and they left ocher things as not proved as not necessary
to a man's salvation. They left undetermined various
questions, and those various questions the Crown in
its declaration had said were to be collected from Scrip-
ture by those who read and interpreted the Scripture, and
who were] entrusted by the Church of England with
that interpretation. The Learned Judge in the court
below had said the Articles of the Church of England were
open to doubt ; was that doubt to be solved by a person
in the position of a single judge of the Ecclesiastical
Court? He contended if those Articles were open to
doubt that doubt was to be settled in a full convocation
of the clergy, and not by the dictum of a judge in the
Ecclesiastical Court. W hat was the effect of the
decision of the Learned Judge? If the bishops might
lay down rules of faith from expressions in the de.
votional services of the Church, where was to
be the limit to that authority ? A clergy-
man might be capable of holding a living
in one diocese, and incapable of holding a living in
another, owing to a diversity of opinion between the
bishops of those dioceses—nay, more, a clergyman
might be deemed unworthy of holding a living in the
life of one bishop and worthy in the life of another. To
affirm the sentence of the Court below would be giving
the opinion of the Bishop of Exeter, on expressions used
in the devotional services of the Church of England,
the force and Effect of an Act of Parliament. The
Learned Counsel read from an early liturgy in use in
1549, and before the Articles were framed, certain expres-
sion from the various offices, from which ho deduced that
there was in them as clear and express a declaration
of the regeneration of baptism, and as plain a litany for
that blessing as was contained in the. Book of Common
Prayer. Scripture from the beginning to the end had
been silent with respect to infant baptism; and the
Church of England had wisely abstained from giving
its opinion upon it. He would found another argument
upon the usage that had prevailed in the Church of
England on the effect of infant baptism. Bishops
and writers of great eminence in the Church of Eng-
land had entertained different notions upon infant
baptism, and they had, nevertheless, still retained their
position in the Church of England ; and now it was
said that a clergyman, who ventured to differ in some
respects from his Bishop on points of doctriae, was in-
capacitated from holding preferment in the Church.
After the publication of the Articles in 1562, bishops
and writers of great eminence in the Church of Eng-
land, had held opinions in favour of the doctrines of
election and predestination, which were diametrically
opposed to the Articles of the Church. If the Ecclesi-
astical Court could not determine the interpretation to
be put upon the Articles, neither could the Bishop, in-
asmuch as an appeal lay from the Bishop to the Eccle-
eiat-tical Court.
Tho Learned Gentleman had not concluded his ad•
dre,s at the rising of the Court at twenty minutes to
four o'clock.
The Court intimated its inability to sit either on
Thursday or Saturday next, so that the further heating
of this case will proceed to-day and on Friday.
Dr. Beyford is counsel, with Mr. Turner, for the ap-
pellant, and Dr. Addams and Mr. Ba,ddeley represent the
Bishop of Exeter.

FROM THE LONDON GAZETTE
OF TUESDAY.
WAR-OFFICE, DEe. 7.
10th Light Dragoons—Lieutenant Randall Wilmer
Hatfield, frog the 13th Light Dragoons, to be Lieu-
tenant, vice Blair, who exchanges, Dec. 11.
13th Light agoons—Lieutenant Edward James
Stopford Blair, from the 10th Light Dragoons, to be
Lieutenant, vice Hatfield, who exchanges, Dec. 11.
lit (or Royal) Regiment of Foot—Ensign Henry
Wichcote Turner to be Adjutant, vice Bidgood, who
resigns the Adjutancy only, Dec. 11.
&h Foot—Major James Croft Brooke, from the 31st
Foot, to be Major, vice Lumley, who exchanges, Dec. 11.
24th Foct—Ensign Richard Henry Holland to be
Lieutenant by purchase, vice Selby, who retires, Dec. 11;
Ensign Charles Petras Geneve, from the 17th Foot, to
be Ensign, rice Holland, Dec. 11.
31st Foot—Major Frederick Douglas Lumley, from
the Bth 'Foot, to be Major, vice Brooke, who exchanges,
Dec. 11.
32d Foot—Ensign Adam Duff Kirkwood, from the
76th Foot, tc be Ensign, vice Stapleton, appointed to the
43d Foot, Dec. 11.
35th Foot—Lieutenant-Colonel Aralander Tennant,
from half pay Unattached, to be Lieutenant-Colonel,
vice Benjamn Francis Dalton Wilson, who exchanges,
, Dec. 12.
43d Foot—Lieutenant Dawson Cornelius Greene, to
bHeoCn
oa
up
rt aa ibnl , b e
Henry purchase,
w ro
chase, vice Greene; Ensign Francis George Stapleton,
from the 32d Foot, to be Ensign, vice Lord Lurgan,
otoot e,
be wLhi
eourteetni raenst
bEyn
pa Ensign-
t vt
ca
e Cy
appointed to:he 76th Foot, Dec. 11.
48th Foot—Captain James Webber Smith, to be
Major, by purchase, vice Brevet Lieutenat-Colonel
Bruce, who .retires; Lieutenant George Abercrombie
Robinson, tc be Captain, by purchase, vice Smith;
Ensign Richard Morgan Hall, to be Lieutenant, by
purchase, vies Robinson, Dec. 11.
64th Foot-Ensign Horatio Glynn Grylls to be
Lieutenant, by purchase, vice Burn, who retires ;
Lieut .Willian Bell to bo Adjutant, vice Burn, who re
signs the Adjutancy, Dcc. 11.
76th Foot—Ensign Charles Lord Lurgan, from the
43d Foot, to be Ensign, vice Kirkwood, appointed to the
32d Foot, De;. 11.
3d West India Regiment—Staff Assistant-Surgeon
Thomas Matters to be Assistant-Surgeon, vice Deakins,
who exchanges, Dec. 11.
Ceylon Rdle Regiment—Second Lieutenant William
Joseph Gornan to be Adjutant, vice Clement, promoted,
Dee. 11.
UNATTACileD.—Brevet Lieutenant-Colonel Aralan-
der Tennant, from the 35th Foot, to be Lieutenant-
Colonel, with)ut purchase, Dec. 11.
BREVET.—To be Majors in the Army in the East
Indies—Captain George Malcolm, of the Ist Regiment
of Bombay liative Infantry, June 22; Captain Neville
Bowles Cham)erlain, of the 16th Regiment of Bengal
Native Infantry, Nuv. 2.
HosriTaL SlAM—Assistant-Surgeonßobert Thomas
Deakins, from the 3d West India Regiment, to be As-
tsistant-Surgern to the Forces, vice Manners, who ex-
changes, Dec.ll.