The Sun.
London, England, 1870-10-15 00:00:00

THE CIIURCH CONGRESS.
(CENTRAL PRESS TELEGRAM.)
SOUTHAMPTON, FRIDAY,

At the sitting of the Church Congress to-day, Earl Nel-
son introduced the subject of " Christian Unity." He
said the unity of the undivided Church was not inconsistent
with the freedom possessed by different churches with
different customs and liturgies, so long as they were
united by the general agreement of the whole church in
a simple creed drawn up in general coun-
cils by representatives of these different churches.
Tlle same system which affected the Greeks
and which for political reasons suppressed the Huguenots
in France, had been acted upon in penal laws against our
own Nonconformists in the narrow-minded dogmatism of the
present religious life, whileßome sought to bind freeintel•
lect. With her it was impossible, but the Greek Church was
different, it not being committed to condemnatory prac-
tices, neither did it peek to bind them on others, as the
terms of union. Especially we should try to unite with
Nonconformists by explaining our creeds to them, and by
seeking out points of agreement rather than searching for
differences. They should be content zealously to main-
tain one side of a truth, being thankful to those
who contended earnestly for another side of it.
The Rev. S. May followed, his paper being on " Re-
formed Churches of the Continent." It argued that we
should be friendly with those who shared with us in
the Reformation. We had been once intimate ; why
not so now ? The paper sketched the doctrine and
discipline 0£ these churches, and concluded by saying that
while loyalty to our own Church restrained us from
full communion with Continental reformed churches,
as they are we should try to induce them to
remedy the defects in their ministry. He thought
it was especially desirable there should be an union with
the Moravian Church, and believed this would ultimately
be accomplished.—Archdeacon Churton read a paper on
the Greek and Eastern Churches.—Mr. Pearson, Q.C.,
raised the question, " Were we larger minded than our
forefathers !" He said time was when the churchyard of
a parish received all who died within that parish ; but that
was not the case now. Churchyards no longer sufficed ;
and in our cemeteries a broad road separated those
who refused to walk together while living, whilst rival
chapels testified to the terrible height Christian men carried
their rancour—beyond the tomb it would seem to even the
very gates of heaven. If there was union among Christians
what a different world this would be. —Canon Freemantle
and Dr. Littledale spoke upon the subject, and Bishop
Ryan contended that it was the duty of the Church
to present a bold front before all other churches
as well. With regard to infidelity and heathenism it was
not the duty of the Church of England to ask any other
Church to receive her into her fold, but to say—" come
with us and we will do thee good."
The whole of the afternoon was occupied with a dis-
cussion on the steps to be taken to secure the reunion of
Nonconformists with the Established Church. The Rev.
J. C. Ryle, in his paper on the subject, argued that the
reunion meant concession, and large concession too, on
the part of the Church herself. It was too much to ex-
pect English. Dissenters to come cap in hand to sue for
admission at the first intimation of the
Church's readiness to receive them. The first
practical step to be taken was to offer increased
facilities for the admission of Nonconformist ministers
into holy orders. The next step was to reform the Act
of Uniformity. The third step was to devise systematic
plans for utilising religious zeal. The Bishop of Peter-
borough, while admitting himself to be an earnest Church
reformer, who deplored the existing differences between
the Church and Nonconformists, said it was no use to
talk about reunion until the Church had ascertained and
recognised the idea of unity which Dissenters themselves
entertained. A soirde•this evening brought the congress
to a close. Nottingham will be the next place of
meeting.

THE ST. PANCRAS GUARDIANS AGAIN.
After a short interval of peace the St. Pancras Guar-
dians have once more got at loggerheads. At the last
meeting of the board a report was read from the Visiting
Committee, who had been requested to inquire into alleged
cases of unnecessary inquests being held.—Dr. Ellis, on
being called on, said one of the cases was an accidental
death ; in the second the jury returned a verdict that the
person died from natural causes ; and the third was that
of a child, who died the day after vaccination.—With
regard to the second case, which was that of a young
woman who had died in her confinement, some of the
jury thought the inquest unnecessary, when the coroner
read a letter from her two brothers desiring an inquiry,
as they alleged their sister had been tampered with by
the young man with whom she kept company
to procure abortion prior to being admitted to the
workhouse. As to the child Perry, it was admitted with
the mother about ten days before it died, which was on
the 15th August, and the mother being found insane was
sent to the insane ward, where she still was. On the
regular vaccination day (Wednesday) he (Dr. Ellis) vacci-
nated the child. It was weakly from being fed by hand,
but it was healthy. On the following day it died sud-
denly, and at the time not being unmindful of the grave
charges which had been made and were then hanging
over.the head of his colleague, Dr. Hill, in reference to
the vaccination of children, and thinking he might be the
object of similar charges and thus subject vaccination
again to be brought into unmerited disrepute, he wrote to
Mr. Fildew, the clerk to the board, and stated there had
better be an inquest. The inquest took place, and he
gave it as his opinion that the child had died from con-
gestion of the lungs and brain, arising from want of breast
milk. No suggestion whatever was made before the
coroner that there had been any improper vaccination.
The board having considered the whole subject, reported
that they were of opinion that there was no reason to ques-
tion the correctness of the verdict of the jury in this case.
Mr. Parson thought it a most barefaced thing for Dr.
Ellis to charge in the book Is. 6d. for the vaccination of
this child as a successful case, dying as it did the next day,
whereas it required nine days to test if a vaccination was
successful or not. He considered the report unsatisfactlry,
and moved that it be referred back to the committee.—
Mr. Furniss, in allusion to some quack handbills dis-
tributed among the board against vaccination, said these
affairs were got up by the opponents of vaccination, but
the course adopted had been ratified by the coroner and
jury. (Oh, oh.) Had they no faith in that ?—Mr.
Watkins : No ; not in a jury with Dr. Lankester for
coroner. (Oh, oh.)—Mr. Furniss : Why a jury is called
the " palladium of English liberty." (Laughter. )
Mr. Yolland charged the medical officer with vacci-
nating these children, not alone for the fee of
eighteenpence, but for the larger fee attendant
upon post-mortem examination. (Oh, oh.)—Mr.
Chandler entered his protest against such dis
graceful assertions. It was actually charging the medical
men with the wilful murder of children to obtain the
fees. Mr. Joseph Salter considered it the duty of
the board to protect their medical officers against these
slanders. After further discussion the amendment was
put and negatived.—Mr. Parson moved and Mr.
Watkins seconded a further amendment, to send a report
of the case to the Poor-law Board and call for an inquiry.
This was also rejected, and the original motion ultimately
carried.

LORD CHARLES HAMILTON IN THE CHANCERY COURT.—
In the Chambers of Vice-Chancellor Bacon the case of
Emanuel v. Padwick was brought before Mr. Bloxam,
Chief Clerk. The plaintiff is a jeweller and goldsmith
carrying on business in Burlington Gardens, and the
object of the suit was to set aside a release executed by
him to Mr. Henry Padwick, as the factor of Lord Charles
Hamilton, on the ground that it was obtained by a fraudu-
lent representation of his lordship's insolvency. The
transaction to which the release referred was the purchase
of jewellery of the value of £lO,OOO. Messrs. Gregory
and Roweliffe, acting as the defendant's solicitors, now
applied for additional time to reply to the allegations con-
tained in the bill, alleging that the plaintiff had not made
a full discovery of all books and documents relating to the
suit, including a number of bills of exchange and accep-
tances. Messrs. Lewis and Lewis, who represented the
plaintiff, argued that they had disclosed, so far
as their position enabled them, all the documents
which were not privileged. The Chief Clerk was of
opinion that it bad not been proved that a discovery of all
the documents affecting the suit had been made. The
affidavits, therefore, were insufficient, and he would grant
the defendant a fortnight's further time.
THE RUSSIAN GOVERNMENT AND THEIR RAILWAYS.—
The suit of Hope v. the New Russian Railway Company,
was brought before Mr. Bloxam, Chief Clerk in Vice-
Chancellor Bacon's Chambers, it being instituted against
Prince Paul Lieven, nephew of the Czar of Russia some
members of the Russian Government, Sir Daniel Gooch,
Sir William Wiseman, and other gentlemen prominent in
the railway world, for the purpose of setting aside certain
agreements, and enforcing the performance of others,
relating to a release from the construction of railways in
Russia. The sum involved was £370,000, and the action
was based on the allegation that fraud had been com-
mitted. The solicitor appearing for the defendants said he
believed they would be no difficulty whatever, in refuting
the charge of fraud. Those of the defendants mentioned
in the bill who were best in a position to rebut the accusa-
tion, and prepare an answer to the whole bill, were now
engaged on railways near Sebastapol ; and he consequently
applied for an extension of time to file the reply. The
Chief Clerk acceded to the application by granting one
month.