The Sun.
London, England, 1845-02-28 00:00:00

aver by the Mayor of Exeter, a most worthy individual.
' lie (the Bishop of Exeter) had not lately read the
newspapers much, but he understood that the speeches
that had been delivered were singular for the ignorarioe
they displayed. There was one speech,y however, he had
read, and only one, Mr. Bere e, a barrister of five
years' standing, that did not take the same line
as the Noble Earl. He proposed petitioning
the Queen, and not coming to that House.
The example was set by the Noble Lord opposite, and
afterwards followed by the Mayor of Exeter, and other
persons. At first they petitioned the Queen, but now
they were petitioning their Lordships. But he must
say he thought their determination nut to go
to Parliament was much more- constitutional than
their present step, and for this reason. The Queen
could, if she were advised to do so by Parliament, take
a course which would really settle this business on a con-
stitutional principle. At the meeting held in Exeter this
learned gentleman said the Queen, through her supre-
macy, had power to alter and settle the rubric. The
learned gentleman told the meeting that this early supre-
macy came from the Pope. The learned gentleman con-
tended, that because the Pope was the supreme head of
the Church during his usurpation of power in this
country, and had the privilege of settling the rubric, the
Queen possessed the same jurisdiction by the statute law.
Now he (the Right Rev. Prelate) would venture to say
that no such jurisdiction was given to Henry VIII. by
Parliament. No spiritual jurisdiction whatever was
given to the Crown, and the power of altering the rubric
was left er.tirely to the Church. No ancient law-what-
ever gave the Crown power to impose upon the Church
any change or alteration in the rubric. But this learned
gentleman said the Queen had the power of doing this
and acting alone in the Privy Council. The learned
gentleman added that the Archbishops and Bishops
were members of this .Council, and of course they would
be her Majesty's advisers in this matter. Now, he was
not aware of this before, but the learned" gentleman
said they were called " Right Rev. Prelates,". by virtue
of their office of Privy Councillors. He believed that
that gentleman was a man of high respectability. He
was certainly a man of very considerable property, and
he (the Bishop of Exeter) knew that he administered it
with great advantage to the people around him. He be-
lieved also that he fulfilled the duties of' Judge over the
Court over which he presided with very great ability.
BUt perhaps his ignorance of the subject on which he
had now entered gave him more time to attend to the
Court of Bankruptcy. lie had now done with South-
molton. The next point he had to take up was the pe-
tition of Dr. Carwithen, which he believed had occa-
sioned great excitement. He (the Bishop of EXeter)
believed that Dr. Carwithen was a very strict observer
of the rubrics. Indeed, he had an impression that there
was no more strict observer of the rubrics in England
than Dr. Carwithen.. He believed that it had been the
practice of Dr. Carwithen to carry out every one
of the rubrics. How, then, could the Noble
Earl say that these practices were utterly obsolete?
He believed his last pastoral.. letter had taken from Dr.
Carwithen the distinction of observing all the rubrics.
Ile did not mean to say that Dr. Carwithen would feel
this as a grievance ; but it appeared that he was placed
in .a state of great excitement by those frightful statutes
of 2d and 3d of Edward VI., and the Ist of Elizabeth.
Now if the Noble Lord would bring in a Bill to repeal
those statutes, and thus free the Rev. petitioner twin the
tremendous penalties which those statutes imposed, he
would be one of the first to support that Bill.—(Hear,
hear.) Knowir.g the excitement which had been raised
by a petition presented in another place, he had felt it
his duty, under the fear of falling into any misapprehen-
sion, to consult two very learned friends, whose opinion
their Lordships were accustomed very much to rely on.
They confirmed distinctly the 'construction he had put
on the Act. That Act did not apply, except there was a
resolute and obstinate refusal to obey the rubric. The
phrase was, that-if any obstinate person should refuse,
Zee., he would be liable to the penalties. What became,
then, of the anxiety of the Noble Earl-for the bishops?
It was very true that there were instances of indictments
being preferred at an early period in the- reign of
James 1., when certainly no case of obstinacy' was
proved against the defendant, but their Lordships would
bear in mind that at that time the non-observance of the
statute was the exception, and in those times there would
be sufficient reason fur a conviction; but he had been in-
formed by the learned person to whom he had referred
that now an indictment could not possibly be sustained
under similar circurnstanees. Dr. Carwithen stated that
the Marriage Act had set aside a portion of the rubric,
inasmuch as it provided that in certain cases banns might
be Published in she afternoon. The rubric provided for
this, and therefore Dr. Carwithen was mistaken in his
allegatisn. The Marriage Act, so far from ale ring the
rubric, carefully avoided dealing with it. The rubric
recognised the right of the Crown to require anything
• that could be lawfully published in the church to be pub
lished, because it directed that nothing should be pub-
lished in the church except by the order of the Crown or
the ordinary. He earnestly entreated their Lordships to
remember what would be ,the effect of the course they
were now called upon to pursuse. Jn the year 1643
their Lordships' predecessors fornied themselves into a
Committee of religion. Their Lordships' House at that
-time consisted of men of great talent; they were warm
supporters of the Church, and when some alterations
were made in the Liturgy, they required that common
prayer should be used according to the laws of the land
with respect to common prayer. In three years the
same House that began by inquiry agreed. to abolish the
common law with respect to prayer. He trusted their.
Lordships would not enter into a question of that sort,
if they found it was not their duty to do so. For his
own part he did not think the House had the power to
do so, but that it lay in the Crown. The principle' had
ever been recognised by Parliament that in matters re-
lating to the. Church, those who were appointed instruc-
tors by the Divine head of the Church were to propose
the laws which guided them, and that the lay members
of it were to signify their assent or thssent,
as it might be, to what was so proposed.
Ile did hope that if at any time, any proceedir'
of that kind should be deemed necessary, it would
emanate from the Crown, and not, as in this case, to
bring by petition the subject before their Lordship?
House. He thought at the present time it was very de-
sirable to adopt that course, in order to let the excite-
ment which had astonished no one more than himself to
die away. If before that time it was thought necessary
to act otherwise, he would venture to predict -that the
practices of 1645 would be again but too fearfully ap-
parent.
Lord BROUGHAM deprecated all Parliamentary in-
terference in the controversy which was at present di-
viding the Church ; and he might, perhaps, be allowed
to congratulate the House and the country that there
was no more important matter to divide the Church
than this mere matter of discipline—a question merely
involving the propriety of whether a sermon should be
delivered in a surplice or a black gown.---(Laughter.)
Many persons conscientiously advocated the use of sur-
plices, and it was not for him, God forbid 1 to say that
a matter affecting men's consciences should be in any
way trifled with. Undoubtedly a difference of opinion
did prevail, and it had' happened that certain things,
laid down 170 years ago, or more, matters of form which
wire deemed fit and proper to be exacted from clergy-
men, should, since they had fallen into other hands—
(Laughter)—and upon other views, be so changed that
they were no longer a matter of moment; and he (Lord
Brougham) thought, therefore, that it would have been
a matter of common sense to have allowed things to go
on as they were, whether they were trifling or important,
as the revival of them only gave rise to discontent and
anarchy, and scandalous dissensions between the pastors
and the flocks, of all things that which should most care-
fully have been avoided. He (Lord Brougham) agreed
in the general recommendation issued by the
Right Reverend Prelate to his spiritual children; he
agreed in the humanity, the wisdom, and the cha-
rity of that recommendation, and at the time
when he first saw the pastoral letter he admired the
tone of wisdom, humanity, and • charity exhibited in it.
On -no account whatever would he wish the subject
brought before Parliament, for he was quite sure that
the very worst thing they could do was to call for Parlia-
mentary interference. He agreed with the Right Rev.
Prelate in some things he had advocated,' but he dis-
agreed with him in others. As a son of the Church he
certainly agreed to the rule that the laws of the Church
should be made by her fathers, and he certainly did not
think- that that was the place for discussion upon this
subject.
The Bishop of EXETER, in reference to a remark of
the Noble Lord, did not believe that in any one of the
churches itrhis diocese the rubric had got into univesral
disuse. But in one parish one practice prevailed, and in
another another prevailed ; and his object, in promul-
gating his letter, was
,to reduce their various practices to
something like regularity.
Earl FORTESCUE, while giving credit to the Bishop
of Exeter for the zeal and conscientiousness with which
he had performed his duties, cOuld not help wishing that
he had left things as, they' were; and in that case the
petitions which he had that night presented might have
been spared to the House.
The Bishop of EXETER said the way in which he
was alluded to by the Noble Earl called upon him for an
explanation. Ile requested the House to remark the
animus which pervaded his letter. His sole object in
effecting a change, was to prevent the necessity for
future change.
The Bishop of NORWICH had no wish to interfere
in the discussion on a subject relating to one peculiar
dibeese, but he could not avoid saying that the general
feeling of his own diocese was opposed to the re-
vival Of any form that ' approximated in a dis-
tant degree to the rites of the Roman Catholic Church.
and he rejoiced that this feeling was so universal, and
that therefore those petitions had been presented. It
shovved;tif least that the laity were alive to the subject,
and the temperate and calm, and dispassionate address
which they had presented would he hoped animate the
masses of the people of England. They could never
return to the rubrical forms, which were itnprac-
ticable in the present state of society. The Right Rev.
Prelate said that they were under stringent obligations
to abide by the rubric. He (the Bishop of Norwich)
said they were not so stringently botind, because they
in fast could not be so. He did not see by what right
any Right Rev. Bishop could say "This part of the
rubric I will order in my diocese, and that I will dis-
pense with," and so forth. He felt that that was utterly
impracticable, and therefore he rejoiced that they at-
tempted to remove some of the difficulties which beset
the question.
The Bishop of LONDON was understood to say, that
where the rubric could be 'enforced it was incumbent on
them to do so.
The petittons were ordered to be printed.
ITALIAN EXILES.
Lord ItEAUMONT proceeded to fulfil the notice
which he bad given on the previous day, of putting a
question to the Noble Lord the Secretary of State for
Foreign Affairs, relative to an expedition which sailed
last year from Corfu to the coast of Italy. He, felt that
considerable importance attached to this question, in-
asmuch as upon the answer he should receive would