New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1868-06-05


Chancellor two hours and twenty minutes 70 say So
Most of his elaborate opinion Is occupied WIN q
ylctauff of the evidence with good deal OF halSh
comment on poor old Mrs. Lyons defects of memory.
The gifts and deeds declared fraudulent ana Voa
I'm respect to spTituallsm, developed by the CYL
denCe Mr.. Homes included, the Nice-Chancellor mas
a clear opinion. He pronounces 1t system OF ms ms
cheyous nonsense, well calculated on the one mana
TO deude the vain, the weak the foolish ana tne SUI
peTSti0uS; and On the other to assist me projects
of the needy and of the adventures ana aslly inat
beyond all doubt there is plain law enough, ana pam
enough to forbid and prevent the retention OF
acquisitions such as these by any medium, Wnether
with withOuta strange gift and that TINS should DC
so is of public concern and to the words Of Lord
Hardwck of the highest public utility Luckily for
Mrs. Lyon the money and securities are all sale IN
court Mr.. Home having been arrested at the begin
ming of the suit and compelled to deposit them IN or
der to regain his liberty 1t IS amazing that so clever
a scamp did not put his plumber beyond reach put
there is often a fatality IN such things. ih3t MI
Home has not wholly lost his wits appears by ms re-
fusal TO submit his spirtualistC Juggcry to the IN
vestgation of Tyndall or other men OF science. 10
has been driven out of almost every country III
Europe. Perhaps America, where Mr.. Home assures
there are 100000 spiritualists, may invite MN "
resume his interrupted career.
The Harvard men unlucky in their advisers.
After sending one challenge to OXFORD Nnicn We
ClOgged with unreasonable conditions ana theISIoIc
properly rejected they have sent anoiheI' Will
they cOntTived should be so addressed thaI hop9!y
could either accept or decline II. Ihey pIOIoseu 10
the authorities potent at Oxford this year 70 row
race next year, when these AUTHORITIES VIII nave 10
existence. lt must be presumed lnat luo liI tlu
men are unaware of this fact; but III is pity theS
have no access TO any source of correct information
Even an Oxford Almanac would nave tola them WiaU
they now learn from the gOOd-natuie9 ielttI Vi NlI
william There is happily, no disposition here TO
charge the Harvard men with playing game on
bluff: but if the charge had been made. they woulu
have had right to complain. II theH pelslS, III
wanting to row next year. and Will send proper
challenge at the proper time, to the proper persons
they are sure to be accommodated. Is IL 700 lalo 10
hone they will be more prudent
/ eppU M w SlOuld take
upon which your Boston correspondent, Is" enters
in reply to my letter on the Oxford and Cambridge
boat race He does not lmpeach any statement oi
mine, and am content he should maintain ms own
opinions If he speaks by any authority OF lhe Iiar.
ward men, his mistakes help TO explain theirs. bGI
it does seem odd that he OF they sh0uu base lIeIr
homes of victory on a civil speech made rs an TX
ford rowing man" who saw the University race on
Lake QuinSgamond last Summer. know number
of Oxford rowing men, but cannot think any one
of them would pronounce simply perfect stroke
which averaged As TO the minute throughout thIce
mile race fear such fact would be deemed strong
evidence that il must have been very imperfect lam
ready TO cOncede ut once that no University crew
does pull the Putney course at that rate II such
number of strokes could be obtained without sac
rapidity, the rowing would doubtless be
effective. But it cannot, and the extreme
quclness of the Harvard stroke would prove 10 an
English rowing man that it was short that the oar
was not pull well through. that the men dld not
get forward enough, that they used their arms too
much and their legs too little. lie would say 10
strokes were possible 1Cr squirt, lnOugn u JutIouo
stroke would want to be very sure of his crew before
be tried it, He would hesitate 10 believe, even on
' BIS" authority, that 1t was pulled throughout a
long race and he would not believe at all that
crew which adopted 1t could prove formidable an
I" b. thinks the Oxford men were frightened by
the victory of " four lumbermen from ST. John. n.
b. at Paris last year. Why need he deprecate the
ST. John men3 They or their predecessors taught
Harvard TO row. and are entitled 70 respectful men
ton | don't know much about the Paris races, but
believe the London and Oxford fours were scratch
crows, imperfectly trained. pulling IN boats to
which they were unaccustomed. Nobody esteemed
the race Of any consequence-much less was 1rlght,
ened by it, But suppose they were. Does b
mean to say that Harvard crew can beat the SJohn
men don't say they cannot, or have not but nave
had other things than rowing TO think of for some
wears past and the occasion Of their victory may
have escaped me. AT any rate 1T might De worth
their while to pull tTia-racc with 81. JOhn crew
before coming across the water in search OF Their
English opponents. g. W. s.
MR.. GLADsToYEs IRISH CHURCH BILL.
In the House of Commons on the pod of May
Mr. Gladstone moved the second reading OF his Suspcn
sorry bin Established Church reland Bill IS the tte
The earlier part OF his speech was devoted 10 resume OF
the debates and votes OF the session on the lsh
question for the purpose OF laying fonnoaton iof he
bill From IL lie cOntended that at the beginning OF the
session the Government and the Opposition were
agreed that considerable modihcauOns were heGtS'
sary in the ecclesiastical arrangements OF Ire
land but while the Government proposed, IN Lord
MayO's speech to create religious elual!ty cDy
leveng up" by giving instead Of taking away the OPP
had laid down had induced inc House 10
accept the contrary mode OF tIeatmentconpicte dls
establishment and disendowment The Opposition hsd
laid down. too that the same principles should be APP
piled 10 all other religious bodies III reahd and ,hey ma
renowned the idea OF eudOWnR any otAe
either by state funds or from ecclesiastical property and
for himself he had insisted that the funds should De de-
voted exclusively to Irish purposes He complained mat
the Government, after accepting the second ana thid
resolutions as cOIOHaries OF the nrst' hhouli
sequel 10 tho three resolutions li as they al
United considerable notifications were Necessary IN the
A lfy pqs 70 a and u m onH PERSONS wo
could reasonably and consistently oppose the Dl were
R Gf an Tf b @ c fS ae
would PEoyGe ~ re gSye%e9 81 n e fIIi GG
,ouid be made. TO Mr.. Lidden, who on former even
ing mad urged the futility Of proceeding with thc N
when the Lords were sure 70 feJeeI IT, nc ct
such consideration ought not 10 influence te couet
of the House OF Commons and that he had confident
which had led him TO take up the question would induce
the House OF Lords TO accept the bin
Mr. Hardy was loudly cheered by his supporters when
he rose TO move tue amendment OF which hs haa gwen
lote-thSt ne BIZ BE TEA S2 S5Iod Me- tIs
that the Government were agreed win hin
that religious equality ought 70 be established IN Ireland
and incfes the Regtnp D9Di had never been dis
cussed In the CaDIne rrgiUus fguay, Set up IN
Ireland, could not be confined 20 that GCCtr' IHu5t
De extended 10 England and Scotland, and II ap ESQ"
shnent OF In ireland, the English and Scotch
must be swept away. The argument
that having confessed the necessity of notifications in
tine Church. the Government ought 10 accept Suspcn-
sorry bill Mr. Hardy characterized too absurd and
to require an answer and he denounced
the bill as the first ever laid before Parliament for tho
avowed object OF secularzRg Church property Passing
to the details Of the billWhch. though badly drawn
and ilexpressed, he would make attempt 10 amend
In Communicable Hardy attacked, first tbs preamble,
which, he said contained an untrue recital Her Majesty
had placed her interest in the temperatures OF the
irish Church at the disposal OF Parliament; she had
merely waived that ncIpOsitiOn which might have pre-
vented Parliament considering the question, and she had
In no way given assent beforehand 70 that legsaton
whatever II might be- abdcated her constitutional
right 10 veto the bill Touching briefly the Coronation"
Oath and "ACt OF Union" Arguments against the bill,
and quoting the opinion Of an eminent lawyer that bill
TO dsesabl;h the irish Church. unless there
ing clause Would repca HE Union Mr. Hardy