The Sun.
London, England, 1842-07-28 00:00:00

THE BISHOP OF EXETER.

. . .
(FROM A CORRESPONDENT.)
It it. 4 not generally•known that when a Bishop or-
d'`' icy Deacon or a Priest, this ceremony does not of
-`sat' confer: on.
. the.party a right to preach the Gospel
;,` irist ; the rite of ordination only empowers the
,_'illividual to read the prayers and the homilies, 'and
I'vform the sacraments ; to preach he must have a
,
Parate, a distinct license. The Universities have
` " Wer to, grant this license, so have the Archbi-
• I,"rivithin their provinces, and also each Bishop
N 3,1! IjW his diocese. A license granted by one Bishop
v‘i!fio Poiver.to an ordained Priest to preach within
,oipcese of another Bishop ; and a Rector or Vicar
th,t-144.9,t,0f himself allow a stranger to preach in his
14 if the Churchwarden interferes to demand his
eft to preach.— Vide .50th canon. "Neither the
:rster, ChUrchwardens, nor any other officers of
44' (liurch shall suffer any man to preach :within
11.tir churches or chapels, but such as, by • showing '
~lir license to preach, shall appear unto them to be
4,,fiently authorised thereunto, as is aforesaid."
‘4',p4 the 52d canon orders that " the Churchwardens
14.1
14
11. ace that the names of all preachers which come
their church from any other place be noted in s
r iF, which they shall have ready for that purpose;
flie'rein-any preacher shall subscribe his name, the
\,,,l,_3'when he preached, and the name of the Bishop of
m„.7u he had license to preach." These observations
necessary to explain the conduct of the Bishop of
g44:ter, who has just issued his prohibition on the
oing grounds. , • • .
,1•i,,,,u,!1e Rei-. Vicar of CloVelly, in the north of Devon,
6 ');lltig disriosed to take a trip from home this summer.
Net d ' '
4 the Rev. James Pears, of Bath, to take his
',,„,31t,,v for a period of two or three months ; the Vicar
C''). up his parsonage-house to this gentleman for the
Aii:l7rl; and, on Sunday the 17th inst., he commenced
14 duties, but, during the week, the Bishop of Exeter
4N14.4,e4 , ,... .
v,_ a prohibition to be served upon him and the
I,ijar; iAo thtit the Vicar was obliged to return'on Sun-
,.Vast to perform the duty himself.
i.Al:6lnplaint is not made 'against the Bishop or any
1, Persia Per§on for carrying out the law to its full effect,
4tr, that it shOuld be done partially ; for how seldom
t 2: a Bishop. or it" Minister interfere to prevent a
-L-vl,on Preachin,g who has a license to preach from
of 9 lawful authority.
fluo I,,thiS case, Mr. Pears happens to be a gentleman
and
irTendent property, of Liberal political opinions.
viz i', °use PPose
smd to the general principles of priestcraf
& yi,,;,.,••• ,-. •,- -, -
II; -

is I,"e Duke and Duchess of Sutherland are expPctecl
ri\le north in a few days, to reside in their ancient seat
4441Nbin cud%

,~.. ~~. i'~~ r

..-- ...,F::, 447 r).
•.

LONDON :
THURSDAY IVIOrtNING, JULY 28, 1842.

The conduct of the Ministers in yielding several
ameliorations of our fiscal regulations, the enlight-
ened language they have sometimes held, the strange
despondency and yet abusive language of the anti-
free-trade journals, and the assurances recently given
by several Cabinet Ministers, that the public distress
still occupies their consideration, must satisfy every
man that the cause of free trade has made a very
great progress. If to these circumstances we add the
respectful manner in which the Ministers have re-
ceived the members of the Anti-Corn-Law League,
we shall arrive at a strong conviction that the total
abolition of the Corn-laws is a question now favour-
ably entertained, and must ere long be decided in the
affirmative. All parties agree that Corn-law
abolition verges towards its completion. We are
not willing to allow so important a circumstance
to pass, without reminding our readers that it has not
been brought about by violence. No physical force
has been used. Facts have been enunciated, and
appeals have been continually made to the good sense
of the public. Other causes having as goad a founda-

tion, will be, no doubt, equally successful ; and all
parties, therefore, may be confirmed in moderation by
the example of the advantages of peaceful agitation.
To use violence to obtain such an end, is like smash-
ing an imperfect watch for want of skill to take it to

feces and repair it.
While we would make this lesson; on the one

hand, as impressive for the people as possible,
we would, on the other, caution Ministers not
to rely on violence never being had recourse
to, however much they may provoke it.
There is always some • limit to patience.
They have no right to count on the people being per-
petually discreet. That would he expecting in them
the virtues of angels, while their rulers are very ordi-
nary mortals. Itis idle now to tell mankind they must
obey the law, unless the law be worthy of obedience.
When the subject is discussed in newspaptrs, the law,
it is plain, has lost its prescriptive power. That un-
defined. prejudice. which heretofore gathered around it
the accumulated veneration. of ages—teach .genera-
tion having transmitted to its successor its own in-
herited conviction of the duty of obedience,. confirmed
by its own experience of the advantages of obedience
---is everywhere at an end. Sentimentalists, as well
as utilitarians, testify to this when they complain
that men seek reasons for their creed, and that faith
is limited to what they see. For niters, therefore,
now to fancy that the people will continue to obey a
• law, however absurd and unjust, simply because it is
a law, is to endanger the well-being of society hy re-
lying on the existence of a sentiment which time has
destroyed. We rejoice, indeed, that We do not now
• see in. Sir It. PEEL a settled determination to maintain
an obnoxious law at all hazards, for though peaceful
agitation promises success, it is quite possible to pro-
voke a just, determined, and violent resistance.
If ever a law justified a violent resistance, the Corn-
law does. How unimportant is the freedom of the

press compared to freedom of trade ? What are the
rights of conscience compared to the right to eat ?
What is the value of a right to property in land com-
pared to the right to have the -food which a man can
earn ? The right of self-preservation is at stake, and
the law which keeps food from the people invokes
against it the first law of nature.
By whom, too, is the law passed ? By an ungrateful
aristocracy, who are maintained in idleness and
splendour by the toils of the people they would starve
out of existence. They are not satisfied with their
own wealth, not satisfied with almost fabulous splen-
dourseek for greater possessions
; they must greedily
at the expense of the poor. • Both the nature of the
law, and the vile conduct of those who make it, pro-
voke resistance; and were there no signs of repent-
ance and concession we should despair of the public
peace and public welfare. -
It is quite impossible, indeed, that those who have
stigmatized the law as an iniquity, and denounced
it as a robbery can fail to carry out their doe-
trines to their appropriate conclusion. Men cannot
peacefully submit to stigniati4ed robberyiuid wrong

3. y,