The Sun.
London, England, 1834-07-28 00:00:00

the Crown, and obliged by
.right of their castles and

other tenures, to attend the King in the great-council
of the nation, and to furnish, and keep in pay, troops
of retainers, in numbers proportioned to the extent of
their baronial territories. After the Reformation many
of the clergy Were expelled the Senate—such as the
mitred abbots, for example—and their possessions be-
stowed on'temporal Peers ; and those who remained
were kept to act as a check i►n restraining the licen-
tiousness of an assembly, then in a state of such bar-
barous ignorance, that some of them could not read,
and few could • boast: of any learning beyond that of
being able t 6 write their own names. They were, in
a word, no more than preservers of public decorum
in debate, .and seldom dared to excite the jealousy
of the Houie by either speaking or voting on any
question not: connected with the property or discipline
of the Church.

In Parliament the Bishops, with a few individual
exceptions, have ever been the most violent opponents
of personal and religious liberty. Whenever the
people were to be oppressed by taxes or personal
restraints, the Crown always found its firmest adhe-
rents among the occupants of the episcopal bench.
Burthened with large and expensive establishments—
solely occupied with schemes for the advancement in
life of .a numerous and expensive offspring—goaded
on to the brink of desperation by love of political
pre-eminence—and hard of heart, from the very nature
of their anti-christian communion with their flocks
through the medium of bailiffs and proctors—the
Bishops always looked to the Minister, from whom
only they could expect the gratification of desires
denounced
.by heaven, and mourned over by the
righteous on earth. They were sensible that the
pedestal on which they stood was not the rock on
which Christ built his church ; and hence their
furious denunciations of the Dissenters,—their cling-
ing to the Test and Corporation Acts,—their
phrenzied opposition to Catholic emancipation,—their
monodies over the sepulchre of Old Sarum,—and
a thousand other exhibitions of illiberality, all
equally fruitless, unjust, and contemptible. Even
Bishop BURNET, in his history, confesses that the
conduct of the Prelates in Parliament, from the
earliest times, was marked by a rancorous illiberal
spirit, more worthy of illiterate barbarians than a
Christian Priesthood.

The existence of Deans and Chapters, without cures
of souls, has so long been admitted by all, (save inte-
rested individuals) to be an evil of such immense mag-
nitude, that we only wonder how the country has had
the patience to bear so long with its continuance. The
approval of a resolution, which declares them to be
useless, by the House, will be mild in the extreme ; for
well we know that, they are worse than useless.
We trust Mr. RIPPON will not,—as many others
haVe done,--consent to a polite request to drop these
notices, before Parliament and the country have ex-
pressed an opinion of their merits. Frcim what we
know of the Honourable Gentleman, he is not a per-
son to be cajoled out of the performance of a sacred
and most important duty to his country, by a drawing-
room compliment—by whomsoever paid. He has our
thanks, our confidence, and best wishes for his ultimate
success.

COURT OF CHANCERY.-(THIS DAY.)

COCHRANE V. COCHRANE.

Sir W. HORNE said this was a case that was to have been heard
this morning in his Lordship's private room, but that the parties
had not been able to find the young man. They were however of
opinion, that provided they were armed with sufficient authority he
could be found, and as it was essential not only for the happiness,
but fOr the very existence of the young man that he should be found,
and should be forthcoming, the Learned Counsel hoped the Court
would not hesitate to interfere.

The LORD CHANCELLOR said that the necessary process should
issue in the course of the day.

A FEMALE ADVOCATE.
A lady, neatly and handsomely attired, soon after the Court sat,
entered within the bar, with a brief in her hand, and was just about
to seat herself on the Solicitor-General's right hand, when she was
informed by a gentleman behind the bar that she was trespassing.
This excited some amusement. The lady withdrew immediately,
and took her stand at the entrance to the bar. After having re-
mained there until that which was in course of hearing was disposed
of, she opened her brief and moved towards the Lord Chancellor.
His Lordship. inquired what was her pleasure. She said
she appeared 272 the matter of Beamington (as we understood), a
lunatic, but the Court informed her that that matter could not be
heard then, upon which she retired.

BODENHAM V. RICKETTS.
Mr. SOLICITOR-GENERAL moved in this case to quash a signi-
ficavit, and three writs which had issued upon it on the ground of
irregularity. The writs had issued from the different proceedings
that had been taken, the first from the Court of Hereford,
the second from the Court of Arches, and the third from
the Court of Delegates. The original proceeding was adopted
by the Rev. Dr. Taylor, of Hereford, against Mr. Thomas Bourke
Ricketts, for the non-payment of Church-rates.
The SOLICITOR-GENERAL contended that none of the proceed-
ings were in conformity with the accounts of plaintiff, and the
schedules annexed thereto.

Mr. RUSSELL appeared on the other side.
The LORD CHANCELLOR ordered the whole to be quashed, upon
the objections raised by the Solicitor-General, except the last writ,
which he allowed Mr. Russell further time to look into some autho-
rities upon.
The COURT rose at 12 o'clock, that his Lordship might attend
in the House of Lords.