tt4t alttrofolio.

At a Court of Common Council, on Thursday, the Officers and Clerks Committee reported in favour of continuing the salary of the Common- Sergeant at 1,500/. a year. The Lord Mayor appointed Thursday next for the election.

At the close of last week, we had no space left for more than the bare point of the judgment of the Privy Council in the case of Gorham versus the Bishop of Exeter : the importance of the case justifies some further explanation. In 1847, Mr. Gorham, being Vicar of St. Just-in-Penwith in the diocese of Exeter, was presented by the Crown to the vicarage of Brampford-Speke in the same diocese. On his applying to the Bishop for admission and insti- tution, the Bishop informed him that he must be examined as to his sound- ness in doctrine. The examination commenced on the 17th Deeember, and was continued at great length for five days in that month, and on other days in the next March ; Mr. Gorham not at first objecting . but afterwards re- monstrating at the manner and length of the proceedings. In the end, Bishop Mlpotts refused institution, for the reason that . Gorham held "doctrines contrary to the true Christian faith, and the doctrines contained in the articles and formularies of the United Church of England and Ireland, and especially in the Book of Common Prayer, and administration of the sacra- ment, and other rites and ceremonies of the Church, according to the use of the United Church of England and Irelahd." Mr. Gorham commenced pro- ceedings in the Court of Arches, which terminated in a decision against him; and he then brought the present appeal. The doctrine held by Mr. Gorham, to which objection was made, was that regarding infant baptism. He holds that baptism is a sacrament necessary to salvation, but that the grace of regeneration does not so necessarily ac- company the act of baptism as invariably to take place in that act; the grace may be granted before, in, or or after that act. Baptism is an effectual sign of grace only in such as worthily receive it ; and without reference to the qualifi- cation of the recipient, it is not itself an effectual sign. Baptized infante, dying before sin, are saved; but in no case is regeneration in baptism unconditional. The Court of Appeal had to decide, not whether opinions are sound or un- sound, or mutually consistent, but simply whether they are contrary or re- pugnant to those which the Church, by its articles, formularies, and rubrics, requires to be held by its ministers. From the first dawn of the Reformation, the Church was harassed by a great variety of opinions on baptism and its efflcacy. Resolving to frame articles of faith, it decided the points to be ac- cepted by its members, and reserved other points for future decision, leaving them meanwhile to private judgment. The Articles of 1536 say, that by baptism men and ints shall have remission of sins. In "The 'Ring's Book," entitled A Necessary Doctrine for any Christian published in 1543, baptism "duly received" purges all sins. In the Articles of 1562, the benefits of baptism are expressly asserted to be given to those who "receive it rightly." Other points are equally left undecided in the Articles. In the Book of Common Prayer, the office for the administration of public baptism declares one advantage of bringing many together at the rite of infant baptism to be, that every man present may be put in remembrance of his own profession made to God in his baptism. Prayer is studiously made that the infant may receive remission of sins through the baptism ; and all things being correctly done confidence is expressed that God will favourably receive the Infant; who is done, regenerate and grafted into the Church. But the adult person is not pronounced regenerate till he has declared his faith and repentance. The Catechism similarly requires faith of the recipient, and declares that infants cannot be unworthy recipients, by reason of their inno- cence. Upon this and other points the rubrics and formularies, as well as the articles, are capable of being honestly received in different senses - and upright and conscientious men cannot agree in all points on subjects so'diffi- cult It is not affirmed that the doctrines of Jewell, Hooker, Usher, Jeremy Taylor, Whitgift, Pearson, Carlton, and Prideaux, can be received as evidence of the doctrine of the Church ; but that their conduct was unblamed and un- cIttestioned, proves at least that the liberty left by the articles and formula- free has been enjoyed and exercised by ministers of the Church. The Court, therefore, wan of opinion, that the doctrine held by Mr. Gor- ham is not contrary or repugnant to the declared doctrine of the Church of England as by law established ; and that Mr. Gorham ought not by reason of the doctrine held by him to have been refused admission to the vicarage of Brampford-Speke. They would recommend to her Majesty that the sen- tence below ought to be reversed; that it ought to be declared that the Lord Bishop of Exeter has not shown sufficient cause why he did not insti- tute Mr. Gorham to the said vicarage and they would advisethat the cause be remitted to the Arches Court, to the end that justice might there be done pursuant to the declaration.

• In the Central CriminalCourt, last week, Anne Merritt was tried for mur- dering her husband by poison. Merritt is young and good-looking ; she ap- peared unmoved, though almost undefended ; for Mr. Clarkson obtained a brief from her friends only at the last moment, and had scarcely time to look over it. It was admitted that the prisoner and deceased had lived at ill- will ; that she had purchased poison for objects concerning which she pre- varicated--it was to "kill rats "—to kill herself "because he ill-used her"; and that this poison had been put by her in a cupboard where her husband kept acid and soda for effervescing powders : and it was shown that the hus- band died of poison : eight grains of arsenic were found in his stomach in liquid resembling gruel. It was proved that the husband took an effer- vescing powder on the morning he became ill; that he came home poorly to luncheon, but gave his meat to a *lend, who ate it in the house; he had the gruel prepared, under his notice, and ate of it before the friend ; and the wife and her child ate the gruel which he left. He went our to work, came home worse and died in the night. The deceased belonged to a burial- society, and his worse, was entitled to 77. 108. at his death. e defence did not deny that the wife once vaguely contemplatedharm ; but it asserted that the material proof of crime was wanting, and that the inferences which might be drawn were not more unfavourable than favourable.

In the course of his speech for the defence, Mr. Clarkson condemned the way in which Inspector Coward had "got up a scene," and had obtained ad missions from the prisoner when he took to her house the chemist who had sold the poison. The Lord Chief Baron expressed his concurrence in this censure : Inspector Coward's conduct had been most unjustifiable and im- proper. The Inspector had evidently prepared a proceeding, and framed certain questions, which would enable him to observe the demeanour of the prisoner when she was confronted with the witness whom he had ready in attendance, in order that he might give his own view of the prisoner's con- duct to the Jury ; and his statement to her afterwards, when he had got all he wanted from her, that she had better state what she had to say to the Magistrate, appeared to him to be a piece of hypocrisy, which accorded with all the rest of his conduct. He wished it to go forth to the public, and that the Police themselves should understand, that such proceedings savoured of an excess of zeal which was perfectly unjustifiable, and which ought not to be looked upon in any other light than discreditable." The Jury consulted for half an hour, and then returned a verdict of "Guilty"; but recommended the prisoner to mercy, on account of her for- mer good character. The Chief Baron sentenced her to be banged: the Jury's recommendation would be forwarded to the proper quarter, but he had no expectation that it would affect the nature of the punishment for a crime of strange and horrible frequency" of late. The prisoner, unmoved as at first, protested her innocence. It is stated that there was much evi- dence of her good character, not called through mishap.

Edward Nairne, the stock-broker who was recently convicted of misappro- priating Exchequer Bills of the amount of 1,7001., was sentenced to be im- prisoned for twelve months.

It was rumoured at the end of last week that the closing of the Olympic Theatre was connected with a stoppage of supplies by a_ clerk in the Globe

Insurance-office who had hitherto provided money from the funds of his employers. The defalcations were stated at an enormous sum. On Monday, a pod deal of the mystery was cleared up, and the sum stated to be deficient then seemed to have been a gross exaggeration. Mr. Walter Watts, the lessee of the Olympic, was brought before Alderman Gibbs, at the Mansion- house, charged with having " stolen, taken, and carried away, an order for the payment of money, to wit, for the payment of 1,400k, and one piece of paper of the value of one penny, the property, goods, and chattels of George

Can Glyn, the form of the statute," &c. Mr. Watts had been a clerk in the Globe iranee-office for several years. He kept an account at the London and Westminster Bank. On the 14th February, he paid in a, check for 1,400!.; that check was "for a policy," and was drawn upon Glyn and Co. by the directors of the insurance-office; the money was obtained, and placed to Watts's account; it has since been all drawn out except 281. A clerk at the Globe Insurance-office stated that it was the prisoner's duty to cheek the paid cheeks off with the pass-book and then place them in a drawer ; the check for 1,4001. could not be found in the drawer. Others besides Watts had access to the place. An erasure had been made in the sa-book under the date 19th February, and over it the prisoner had written "Life policy, 7,619, 447/. 10a. 3d." M. Watts left the office on the 5th March, and his papers were sealed up. Daniel Forrester stated that he went with a warrant to Mr. Watts's house, but he was not to be found there ; sub- seguently, he surrendered himself to the officer at his own solicitor's. The prisoner was remanded, on the application of Mr. Freshfield, who stated that it would be necessary to have other witnesses to elucidate the mysterious nature of the charge.

At the Thames Police Office, on Monday, the three Customhouse-officers remanded from last week were brought up for reexamination. After wit- nesses had been examined to prove the detection of the accused, and to show that the tobacco taken was not waste, and that if it were, the double offence —stealing the article and evading payment of the duty—had equally been committed, James Inch, the receiver who has turned Queen's evidence, was called to give testimony. He deposed to a number of transactions with the prisoners. He had bought of them as much as fifty pounds of tobacco at divers times; he bought tobacco of them and of other officers introduced by them ; he sold the tobacco to a dealer and to a Jew, obtaining 2s. 5d. or 24. 6d. a pound for it The accused offered no defence ; and Mr. Yardley was about to commit them for trial, but, at the instance of Mr. Clarkson, who appeared for the Board of Customs, he remanded them for a week. Smith, Hunt, Clarke, Xing, Hubbard, and Harris, all Customhouse-weighers, were then charged with stealing tobacco from the London Dock. Inch was the only witness examined at present. He stated that he had bought to bocce of all of them except Harris ; that the prisoner had called at his homer with the others, but Inch had bought no tobacco of him. Mr. Yardley dis- charged Harris; admitted Smith and Clarke, who had not recently offended, to bail ; but remanded the others to prison.

At Clerkenwell Police Office, on Tuesday, Joseph Edmonds was finally ex- ' amined on a charge of having fraudulently obtained 901. from Mr. Lewis, a jeweller of Old Street The transaction occurred some months since. l'he prisoner sold a silver bar at Mr. Lewis's shop, and stated that he knew a gentleman who had brought a number of bars from the Continent which he wished to sell. Mr. Lewis went with Edmonds to Gravesend, and was ins' troduoed to the "gentleman " ; he produced a number of silver bars, and demanded 1001. for them; the jeweller advanced 901., gave a sovereign to the prisoner, and desired him to call for the balance next day. The bars turned out to be spurious—zinc electroplated with silver. Edmonds denied that the gentleman had ever let him even see the bars; and there seems to have been no evidence to prove his complicity. He was discharged.

When George Lyon, the man accused of forgery, was reaxamined at the Mrmsionhouse, two more cases were brought against him. These,. like the former, were bills of exchange purporting to be accepted by M.;. Curling. It appeared from the evidence of several witnesses, that Lyon sent a person to the London Joint Stock Bank with a letter, and Mr. Curling's pass-book was given to him. One of the forged bills was for 581. 7s. ; the other for 301.: the first of these and the one for 1501. Lyon got cashed,. by !ending- persons to the bard; making an excuse for not going himself. He paid away, the 301. bill to a Mr. Rawll ; afterwards he returned the money to Mr. Raw desiring to have the document back, as he expected that Mr. Curling

not directed the bank to pay it. The bill, however, had been cashed ; and Mr. Rawll paid the 301. to Mr. Curling's account. 'More eases are expected to be brought against the prisoner.

A disastrous powder-mill explosion occurred on Hounslow Heath on Mon- day afternoon, on the premises of Messrs. Curtis and Harvey. They are situated about two miles from the Hounslow railway station, and half a mile from the high road ; an area of fifty or sixty acres is enclosed with a park-railing and a thick fir plantation ; the area itself is dotted with plantations of fir and alder, with the intention of preventing fire from spreading from one building to another should a disaster occur : the present accident hag shown the futility of the precaution. Five buildings were destroyed. The first explosion occurred in the "treble dusting-house," where two men were sifting fine powder previously to packing it up for'sale - there were eight or nine hundredweights of powder in barrels in the piece : the explosion shattered the building to atoms, and killed the men. A. burning fragment fell on a corning-house, a hundred yards distant ; which instantly exploded : then a second corning-house, a glazing-house, and a pressing-house. A mixing-house was also set on fire and burnt down. All the other extensive buildings were more or less shattered by the concussions; and large trees were snapped in two. Six men were killed on the instant ; another died in a few minutes ; and an eighth lingered some hours after he had been con- veyed to the hospital. Two other men were badly hurt.

Of the building in which the first explosion happened, the dusting-house, "not a single stone remains ; the whole fabric has been blown away." The trees for many yards on one side have been either torn up by the roots or cut right through, or had their branches or bark stripped off. A. turnip-field in this direction has been blasted for a considerable distance across. In the press-houses were massive machinery and blocks of teak wood weighing some hundredweights ; the blocks were carried a long way over a mill-stream, and a large fragment of a water-wheel was lodged between the boughs of a fir- tree near its summit.

The explosion was felt and heard throughout a wide tract of country—in London, and even as far as Lewes and Brighton : at Lewes it was thought that there had been an earthquake, and a local paper, unaware of the ex- plosion, had a paragraph to that effect.

An inquest was held on Thursday, on seven bodies ; but they were BO en- tirely mutilated that only three could be identified. James Lambourn, the clerk of the works, said he could not account for the first explosion. The second succeeded seven or eight seconds after. Glazier, one of the workmen in the dusting-house, went to an office for a piece of canvass; in two minutes after his return to his work, the disaster occurred : though Glazier was a most careful workman, probably he took in a bit of grit on his clothes or shoes. Every man was provided with two pairs of shoes, one with cop nails for out-door use, the other with wooden pegs for in-doors; and men ought to change them whenever they entered a building : no portion of Glazier's remains have been found to throw light on this supposition, The only fragments of a body yet discovered are an ear and a finger. James Archer, the foreman of the dusting-house, stated that there would be five or six pounds of powder on the floor while the men were working, and all around would be black with dust. Rolling the barrels was the most danger- ous operation : it was done on leather : some grit may have caused the ex- plosion while this operation was going on. Every precaution was taken to prevent dust or grit entering the workshops from without. The sieves used were made of copper wire. He had been employed at the works twenty-six years, and his father fifty-six, and neither had known of a dusting-house exploding before. Mr. Thomas Curtis, one of the proprietors, said that the dust arising from the powder was the most dangerous substance, but there was no means of preventing entirely its accumulation : it found its way everywhere, penetrating like water. Probably Glazier entered the house hurriedly, and neglected to change his slippers. In answer to the Coroner, Mr. Curtis said he did not perceive any way of reconstructing the works so as to make them less liable to accidents : an opinion with which Captain Tulloch, the Superintendent of the Government Powder-works at Waltham Abbey, concurred after examination of the ruins. Mr. Wakley, the Coroner, advised the Jury, in the absence of any positive testimony as to the cause of the disaster, to return an open verdict. They did so; stating that the men had been killed by an explosion ; but that there was no evidence to prove how the explosion was caused.

It is stated that Messrs. Curtis and Harvey will pension the families of the deceased.