OUR LONDON LETTER.

Evening Star, Issue 3905, 30 August 1875, Page 3

OUR LONDON LETTER.

J.r.Miox, duly In my last letter 1 referred to the case oi the Brighton Aquarium, whose proprietor', it wdi be remembered, suddenly found timm.-elvei.-liable to the exaction of enormous pemdl.b s for keeping the establishment, open on Sum! ivs. It was, however, suggested, ns a doniefui point, whether it was the sacred music, books and newspaper, or the fishes that In ought the establishment within scope of the Act pi' l‘;umeut ; and, for the purpose of settling flic question, a special case was tr'eil in lie- I 'on;t of Exchequer. The facts ns stated by i cun-sel wore simply those referred t-» in my last ; :.n> as the baud, books, and newspaper.- had been abolished it was reduced in a quo-tion as in whether the aquarium propvL- eva- a “ pl;ev T entertainment or amusement.” The judge, held that if was so, and th" (Ti-d Barm ; I■ l ‘.i that the removal of tin; b.'ohs and hand ml no' show that “ til . 1 , place had cea-vd to amm . hut simply that it was less amusing.” Everyone knew that the Aquaiium was a place of amuse iiiout, and “would eonsiilrr tluunselves maligned and insulted if anyone expre.-seil a eon trary opinion.” The defendants, limn fme. were clearly guilty under the statute and liableU all the peual ties itimpored. I I e, however, arrived at this conclusion “not merly with reluctance, but withailegreeofrcpugnar.ee beyond his power to express, and he hoped the d.-nishm would lead to a great and salutary mem ur; of reform in the laws, so as to enhance the oainfori. of the great masses of the people.” It do.-s not necessarily follow from this decision that the Aquarium will be closed on Sundays until an alteration can he effected in the law. Mi f Vo«« has intimated his intention of remit! lug' any penalties which maybe imposed, so i* i- possible that the Aquarium may keep op.v. Sundays and weekdays, with the combined attraction of band, books, nowspap-vs, and rid es. A movement is taking place among the mm r liberal of the Church of England e.h-rgv for establishing a friendly intercourse with Ammonfonnists and their ministers. Some iime aeo Professor Max Muller, by invitation of 1 InDean, preached or lectured in d\ e- i luin-ccr Abbey, and it is said th »t some leading Am; conformist ministers arc also to be invi ;ed to, preach there. More rec ntly tho Him. and Rev. VV. H. Frecmantie, who is a. v..-iy “advanced” clergyman, was, asked Jo preach in the City Temple, the London head-quarter.-; of dissent, Mr Freeman lie signified his wii lingness to do so, but was inhibited by the Bishop of Loudon, to whose authority be submitted. As, however, doubts were cuter, ahr d respecting the competency of the hi.,hop to prohibit the intended sermon, the opinion nf counsel was taken as to its legality, and this holds that it is not pormi-.-ilm for a clergyman to preach hi any lieen-md dissenting place of worship. The prohibition, however, is not under any statute, but under what is called “ the King s Merle ia.'tieal l.;i ,v. As regards preaching in any unlicensed place m worship, the case would have to be dealt with on its merits. If the main object of the meeting were devotional, the preaching or pof,.nuance of any service would be ill- gal; bin, if the object of the meeting were mainly charitable, and if the meeting were only opened with prayer, that would be permissible. Wuh curious inconsistency, however, the law dorr not prohibit a clergyman from preaching in any place of worship in Ireland or Scotland, in the Colonies, or abroad : provided, of course, that he docs not preach heretical doctrines, A meeting to con.-ider this opinion was held at the City Temple, win u attention was called to the lad oi its being merely an oj inion, not a. judicial decision, aue Mr Samuel Morley offered to hold any clergyman harmless, ;>■* regards the cost of leg 1 proceedings, who would come forward and U-.-a the case by preaching in «• dj.i.,r-nliiig p! ice of worship, On the motion of the Dean ef W,-i----minster » resolution was adopted that ihc io strictions were “injurious to the fr denial intercourse between the various Violeßaut Churches which is required in tlje interests of Catholic- Christianity.” __ Messrs Bloody and San key coiithm- their revival operations at full pie.-sure. An awti.il commotion was produced by a proposition fmthem to go down to Eton ami <(o wh it they could Co evangelise the hoys at that lulsiocratuseat of learning. It appears that a Mr Gudinm, who is a member of Parliament, and who lew a son at Eton, was very divirons that the Mt-.n lads should hear the revivalists; so in obtained for them a letter of inti .-.din. tion to sv.-me of the college authorities. Dr Hornby, the nead <>: the college, wJlo teems to be a sonsihL man, thereupon intimated tllht though he did not think fit to sanction a geviyalutic mn ting in the neighborhood ofjjlhe college, li,c i-iioold not prohibit the boys attending meh a mc { -,-i:«g provided it was only one meeting, but mi u-- ining bruited about that Messes Monde an I Saidoy intended Maying several days at Eton wbh the view of holding closer fijt.e r .eoui.-w wilh the lioys, Dr Hornby said in that.ea.-.e H' n.u-t prohibit their attending any service. Uji neiiig assured, however, that ft. was only intended to hold one .service, the iev.G-ipastor .-aid he thought it best to allow the buy.: tfi; ir usual liberty, which was not iuU-i feted with vln-n fairs or raceu were held near the c die Th<* meeting consequently came off, and about Lid boys attended it. Nothing worthy of uoihv ; transpired beyond a very oxtiv.i'dinury iidiniat.iou from the chief constable oi Buckinghamshire tbat the aid of the comity police could not be given incase of any di.-turhane.’. This feature in the ease >haq not seem i.o have attracted the attention it em-ifor el lbs; sight it would almost appwir like an ...i.e.ti cipent to the roughs that they might no wild-, tlu s }’ liked without; fear <J interfere!.ce. {To he cona,;l. )