The Sun.
London, England, 1870-03-28 00:00:00

SCENE IN THE HIGH COURT AT TOURS•

The scene which, as has been already mentioned,
took place at the trial of Prince Pierre on Thursday,
was one of terrible violence. Some disparaging
remarks had been made by an advocate,
and in return Prince Pierre, who generally
sits passively, violently exclaimed that the indi-
vidual depreciated possessed that courage which
was wanting to the Republican faction. It was at
this moment, says the Times correspondent, that a
loud ringing voice was heard throughout the hall.
"Il a bien assassind Victor Noir" were the words
which I distinctly heard. Then an awful tumult
arose, when the exclamations " Assassin ! A. l'assas-
sin !" again resounded. " I stood up, and
looked back from our Press stalls into
the thronged pit in our rear, and saw
it convulsed with excited groups swaying to
and fro, while in the middle stood Ulric de Fon-
vielle in the hands of about a score of gendarmes,
who shook and dragged him violently, his friends
vainly endeavouring to press forward to the rescue,
but being forcibly held back by the neutrals, or by
men of the opposite, or Imperialist party. On the
very first alarm Prince Pierre Bonaparte stood up
in the dock, burst open the door behind him, and
vanished through it, followed by the Captain of
Gendarmes acting as his escort. He had evidently
been prepared for some riot which might serve as a
signal for an attempt on his life, and had probably
been instructed in any case of alarm to rush from the
hall." Awe and amazement prevailed everywhere.
After the ordinary sitting of the court was over, M.
de Fonvielle was brought in, and made no attempt
to deny, but rather boasted, of having said : " You
have in truth assassinated Victor Noir, you Pierre
Bonaparte, look me in the face, and deny it if you
dare. Assassin ! Assassin !" He was sentenced. to
ten days' imprisonment for Outraging the majesty of
the court.

THE " NATIONAL " PRESS ON T3E COERCION BILL•

The "National" journals made a good thing of
the Coercion Bill in one way, at the close of last
week. They sold well: curiosity being felt as to
what they would say on the subject. The
Irishman is quieter than the Nation, and
there is a boast in both that they are
within the law, and always have been so. Mr.
J. W. Sullivan contrasts the press laws of France
with those of England, of course to the disadvantage
A* the latter. The Nation attacks the Chief Secre-
:ary, Sergeant Dowse, and Dr. Ball, and observes
that if the press clauses of Mr. Gladstone's bill
were brought in as a distinct Act of Parliament,
.the National press would be spared an insult. But
;he course taken by the Ministry in introducing the
clauses in a measure designed for the repression of
-tgrarian crime is a "mean and fraudulent trick."
the Irishman declares, at the end of what can-
aot be termed other than an eloquent article, that the
horrors of '9B are revived, with but slight modifica-
tion. It protests against those Irish members who
voted for the bill, and concludes thus :—" The
i
Joercion Bill may pass, but liberty will survive
into t.—
the Irishman may be destroyed, but the
people will never be thus trampled friendship.
And if its press dies, yet shall an avenger rise from
la bones."

puonc meeting was next at it.udare yesterday
to protest against the contemplated eviction of forty-two
families on the Duke of Leinster's property.
Lady Gardiner fell down in a fit of paralysis the
other day, when calling on a friend, and it is feared she
will not recover. Miss Burdett Coutts is indisposed.
The defalcations of a collecter of internal revenue
in New York, named Bailey, have come to light. They
amount to $125,000. No clue has yet been found to his
whereabouts.

The amount of pay forfeited by soldiers by sentence
of court-martial during the year ending December 31st,
1869, was £6,771 6s. Bd., and the balances in deserters'
accounts £1,19815. 7d.

Seven men were yesterday committed for trial by
the Tipperary magiitrat6s fur Lasgal drilling. One of the
prisoners was a militiaman, and n was proved that on one
occ4sion he acted as drill, instructor.


This case came before the Committee to-day, in the
shape of an appeal from the Court of Arches, against an
order made on the 30th October, by the Right Hon. R. J.
Phillimore, D.C.L., the Judge. The appellant is Mr.
Thomas Byard Sheppard, of Frome Selwood, Somerset-
shire, and the respondent the Rev. James Earley Bennett,
vicar of the same place.

Mr. Archibald Stephens, Q.C., Dr. Tristram, Q.C., and
Mr. Shaw appeared as counsel for the appellant, and I:11
respondent did not enter an appearance.
The case was originally promoted in the Court of
Arches by letters of request and under the seal of the
Bishop of Bath and Wells. Among other charges against
Mr. Bennett, he was accused of having caused to be
printed and published certain works which contained
doctrine contrary and repugnant to the articles and for-
mularies of the Church. One of these works was en-
titled " Some Results of the Tractarian Movement
in 1833," which formed an essay in a volume
called " The Church and the World," which was
edited by the Rev. Orby Shipley, and published in 1867.
Another of the works was " A Plea for Toleration in the
Church of England," being in the shape of letters to Dr.
Pusey, published in 1867 and 1868. The case has been
before the public for a long time, there having previously
been one appeal to the Judicial Committee against the
decision of the Judge of the Court of Arches. The 26th
October last was appointed for hearing the case in the
Arches' Court, but at that time, when the articles were pro-
duced,.the Judge declined to accept them, on the ground
that they were at variance with the letters of request and
with the citation. This point being disputed, an appeal
was granted, and, as stated, it came on for argument
to-day.
Mr. Stevens, in a very lengthy speech, pointed out that
the Dean of Arches had ruled that the articles should be
limited in the charge to the points of which notice had
been given in the citation, and that as the articles con-
tained specific charges, and the citation only ieferted
generally to the works in which were the points which
were the subject of the proceedings, the citation and
b
articles could not be said to be alike, ut that they were
at variance. He (Mr. Stevens) contended that this was
not so, and that to all intents and purposes they were
alike. The citation contained the names of the works
upon which the proceedings were being taken, and upon
which the articles were drawn ; and it was not necessary
that it should do more than this. The citation was merely
the form of commencing the proceedings, and it was not
necessary that it should contain the specific charges. His
object was to bring Mr. Bennett into court upon his works,
and the court, by the letters of request, he contended,
was bound to try the question.
The Lord Chancellor : You contend that under the
citation you have a right to use any charges of heresy
against Mr. Bennett, which may be contained or may
arise in any passage of the works mentioned in the cita-
tion.

Mr. Stephens : That is so, my lord.
The Lord Chancellor : And that you must use those
works only, and not be allowed to import fresh works into
the case.

Mr. Stephens , Just so ; excepting one special matter,
which I will come to presently.
The Lord Chancellor : Then we are with you In that
respect. The charges are contained in the works which
are mentioned in the citation, and any extracts from thong
will be admissable.

Mr. Stephens then continued his argument upon the
article, setting forth that Mr. Bennett believed in the real
presence of Christ in the Holy Eucharist.
Dr. Tristram declined to address their lordships, and
after a consultation,
The Lord Chancellor said this was an appeal against a
decision of the judge of the Court of Arches by which he
had ordered certain articles against Mr. Bennett to be
reformed by omitting all such parts as charged the respon-
dent with contravening the 29th article of the Church,
and the learned judge came to the conclusion on two
distinct grounds, both of which had been argued bef?re
them, and they considered that the judge's decision was
correct, and he would say upon which of those two grounds
they agreed with the conclusion he had arrived
at. They did not concur with him on his first
ground, but they thought the second ground which
went more to the merits and substance of the case WWI
the substantial ground upon which the decision shoukke
supported. In that it was held that this particular charge
of heresy was not brought before the commissioners and
not mentioned in the letter of request, the decree of cita-
tion, and having regard to the practice by which it was
ruled, the articles.must be amended by striking oi.itithat
portion of it which charged Mr. Bennett with contra-
vening the 29th article. Mr. Bennett, it would appear,
publiaied certain works, and the first step taken
was that of issuing a commission to inquire whether
or not further proceedings should be taken. The
commission declared that there were grounds, and the re-
sult was the citation was issued. Nothing arose out of it
in this case, but it might be as well to state at once that
the commission was simply for the purpose of advising the
Bishop, and having performed that function, the Bishop
was left to take his own course. In the citation they held
that it was necessary the respondent should be toloi gene-
rally what were the charges against him, but it w not
necessary to give the details, which were set fortk
afterwards in the articles. Therefore the
considered that in this case the citation held
good. The more serious question to deal with
was whether the articles were supported by the p
in Mr. Bennett's works alluded to. In this respect the
judge had decided that the articles should be awarded if
they felt bound to concur with him. Taking the passages
which Mr. Bennett quoted, they could not say that he
gave his adhesion to anything which impugned the 29th
article. They could not allow the protest which was re-
ferred to, and which was signed ten years ago to weigh
against him, because in no place he reiterated
the views therein contained as to the Beal.
Presence and the reception by the wicked. It
he had adopted certain views of others it could
not be concluded that he agreed with them in tot4,and
the only reference they found was a qualified cote. They
had complied in this, that the articles set forth the pas-
sages upon which they intended to rely, but then those
passages did not bear out the charge. Their lordships
therefore decided that the judge was justified in ordering
the articles to be reformed, and they dismissed the appeal.
As the respondent did not appear, no order is to bo 12;tado
as to costs.

town:

r E -SUN.—LATEST EDITION to be seen
I• in the Coro, Boom, at the "Southampton Arms," Eligh-
sireet, Camin-,-town, where all Sporting and "Political events
are fr;)ely, 'discussed.