The Sun.
London, England, 1870-06-20 00:00:00

ENGLISH BRAVERY.

Englishmen certainly are as brave as lions. In no
other country in the world but England would Hinson
have been allowed in open day and in the presence of a
number of people, to murder his victims at Wood-green
a few months ago. What moral courage was dis-
played on that occasion in checking the natural feelingfi
of indignation which must have been excited by the hor-
rible tragedy ! And since that day we seem, if possible, to
have improved and to have become more fearless in the
presence of crime. At Cremorne Gardens, on Thurs-
day, a marvellous instance of courage occurred
under somewhat similar circumstances. Two cooks
belonging to that establishment having quarrelled in
consequence of a practical joke, one of them drew his
knife from the sheath at his side and pursued the other
round the ldtcheiv " amid the screams of the other
servants, who were afraid to interfere." It ended
in the fugitive being stabbed twice in the left
side and conveyed to St. George's Hospital, with little
hope of recovery. In the event of his death
and the execution of his destroyer, the screams of
" the other servants" will, we suppose, be louder than
ever; but, with every respect for the good-feeling
they displayed, we venture to suggest that the next time
they see one of their body chasing a fellow creatire with
a knife it might be as well to defer their screams
until they have disarmed the intended assassin. By thus
preventing the murder of one man and the execution
of another, they will be doing better service to both than
by any amount of senseless noise before the event. —Pall
Mall Gazette.

THE ARCHBISHOP OF CANTERBURY AND

THE ECUMENICAL COUNCIL.

A very important correspondence has taken place
between the Archbishop of Canterbury and the Bishop
of Gloucester and Bristol, as to the action which it might
be desirable for the Episcopate of the. English Church to
take with regard to the CEcumenical Council. In a letter
which the Bishop of Gloucester and Bristol addressed to
the Archbishop on the 16th inst., he says --" Many
serious people think it would be desirable that the Bishops
of the English Church should place on record some protest
in reference to the present Council in Rome. I can quite
understand the loyal feeling which might move many to
judge such a course to be expedient. At the same time, I
cannot but feel, first, that if the protest be against the
assembling or composition of the Council, it ought to have
been made long ago when the Council was summoned ;
second, that if the protest be levelled against the doctrine
which it is supposed the Council may promulgate, it
would be a protest against a doctrine with which, by the I
nature of the case, the Reformed Church of England
can have but little to do. Being in this difficulty
I venture to ask your Grace's counsel and advice." In
his reply, the Archbishop of Canterbury says : " I cannot
as at present advised, persuade myself that it is desirable
for the Episcopate of the Church of England to come
forward and issue a protest against Papal infallibility.
The statement of our Church, as set forth in articles and
formularies touching the claims of the Church of Rome,
is so full and explicit that, as it seems to me, it requires
neither explanation nor addition. The more dignified,
wise, and sober polity for us to adopt, as I think, is to let
Rome take her own course. The Church of England, as
far as I know, has not at present been addressed b 3 the
Pope, or his so-called (Ecumenical Council, or by any
person whatsoever, and I cannot see any necessity for us
to go out of our way to put forth a manifesto. I fully
expect that if the supporters to the claim of infallibility
are left alone they will do their own cause infinite mischief
and great good to the cause of truth. lam quite sure that
the English nation does not expect any declaration or
action from us other than by a stedfast adherence to our
old principles, both in our practice and in our teaching.
Neither do I think that the great body of Cnristians ex-
pect us to move."

PROSECUTION OF THE VICAR OF .FROME.
The hearing of the case against the Rev. William
Earley Bennett, vicar of Frome, for promulgating in his
written works doctrines contrary to those of the Church
of England, was resumed on Saturday, in the Court of
Arches, before Sir IL Phillimore, Dean. The defendant
was again called three times, but did not appear.
Mr. A. J. Stephens, Q.C., continued his quotations
from the writings of Mr. Bennett, and his arguments there-
upon. Having observed that this arrogant assumption of
the propitiatory sacrifice had been pre-eminently de-
nounced by eminent divines during every period of the
Reformation, the learned counsel referred to the
charge against Mr. Bennett of the adoration
of the Host, and quoted the words of the
reverend gentleman, in which he admitted that he
preached this adoration, and taught it to his people.
Jermey Taylor, and other eminent divines, said.that this
was contrary to the doctrine of the Church of England, for
the reason that Christ being in heaven, he could not be in
the elements, and the Church knows nothing of that spiri-
tual presence for which Mr. Bennett contended. By
maintaining this practice, then, he was guilty of idolatry.
The learned counsel then proceeded to sum up his evi-
dence, contrasting the propositions derived from the 39
Articles, the formularies of the Church of England, and
the opinions of eminent divines with the deduction which
had been drawn from the writings of Mr. Bennett. He
submitted that he had made out his case against the rev.
gentleman in reference to every charge and that the
doctrines he held and taught were distinctly in opposition
to the laws of the Church of England.
Dr. Tristram then proceeded to address the court first of all
in reference to the statement of his lordship at an early
period of the case, that the question he should have to
consider was whether the words of Mr. Bennett were
capable of more than one meaning. He submitted that
it was impossible to come to any other conclusion thanthat
those words could only be construed as conveying doc-
trines totally at variance with the views of the
articles and formularies of the Church of England. Having
considered this point, it would be for his lordship to
say whether such views as those entertained by Mr.
Bennett could be permitted to be taught by any clergy-
man of that Church. As far as he could judge of Mr.
Bennett's views he must be either maintaining the Roman
Catholic doctrine that Christ had only one body after the
Resurrection, and that that was present in the elements;
or he must be maintaining the theory for which no
authority could be found whatever, namely, that Christ
had two bodies—one of which was natural and was in
heaven, and the other a supernatural one, which entered
into the elements by consecration. In conclusion he sub-
mitted that his lordship should read the words of Mr.
Bennett as an ordinary individual would read them.—
His lordship said it was a case of vast importance, not to
Mr. Bennett alone, but to many others, and he would
therefore take time to consider his judgment.

THE BELGIAN TACTICS. The Indapendance
Beige attributes the success of the clerical party to the
faults of the Government, and the offenc e it has given by
disappointing the legitimate hopes of the country. The
Belgian journal refers to the alliance of the Catholics
and the Radicals daring the elections, and draws from it
the inference that the triumph of the Catholic party will
not have the disastrous consequences which might have
been feared at first. At any rate, if the clergy have won
in the struggle, their doctrines are not the less condemned.
The clerical party may be in power, but their dreams
will not be realised. In the present state, of affairs in
Belgium, it is believed that only a transition Minister
can remain in office.

THE MURDERS BY BRIGANDS IN GREECF.—
Part XV. of the Correspondence has been forwarded to
us from the Foreign Office. It contains dispatches and
enclosures from Mr. Erskine to the Earl of Clarendon
from 30th May to 4th June. The only paper of interest is
the report of the trial of the brigands up to a certain point.
The ninth witness examined was M. Theagenis, and his
evidence strikingly illustrates the wild character of the
brigands and their lawless life. Mr. Erskine, in writing to
the Earl of Clarendon, 4th June, explanatory of the
source whence the ransom was to, have been obtained,
states that the Greek Government had never addressed
any communication to him oti the subject, and
adds :—" It is true that at my first interview with the
King, on his return from Syra, his Majesty stated
to me that he had given order that whatever funds might
be requisite were to be furnished by the National Bank
or the public chest, and of course if there had been the
least difficulty in procuring the money I should not
have hesitated in availing myself of his Majesty's most
gracious offer. But I looked on the question of liability as
one that would have to be officially discussed between
the Governments of England and Greece, and I did
not think that it would have been becoming in me to
attempt to fix upon his Majesty personally the liability
which could be more properly settled with his Minis-
ters. It was Mr. Merlin, the general manager of the
lonian Bank, who, without a moment's hesitation, under-
took on my own responsibility and that of Lord Muncaster
to furnish £20,000 in specie for the ransom of the four
English captives."