IMAGE EVALUATION
TEST TARGET (MT-S)

^ ^

11°

1.1

1^128 |25

£f 1^0 H2.0

FhotograjM:

Sciences

Corporation

23 WIST MAIN STMET

WiaSTIR,N.Y. U5M

(716) •72-4S03

CiHM/ICMH

Microfiche

Series.

CIHIVI/ICIVIH
Collection de
microfiches.

Canadian Institute for Historical l\Aicroreproductions / Institut canadien de microreproductions historiques

Technical and Bibliographic Notas/Notaa techniques et bibiiographiquee

Til
to

The Institute has attempted to obtain the best
original copy available for filming. Features o^ this
copy which may be bibiiographically unique,
whicii may alter any of the images in the
reproduction, or which may significantly change
the usual method of filn ing, are checlted below.

Coloured covers/
Couverture de couleur

I I Covers damsged/

Couverture endummagie

Covers restored and/or laminated/
Couverture restaurte at/ou pellicula

Covnr title missing/

Le titre de couverture manque

Coloured maps/

Cartes g^ographiques en couleur

Coloured inic (i.e. other than blue or black)/
Encre de couleur (i.e. autre que bieue ou noire)

□ Coloured plates and/or illustrations/
Planches et/ou illustrations en couleur

□ Bound with other material/
ReilA avec d'autres documents

Tight binding may cause shadows or distortion
along interior margin/

La re iiure serr6e peut causer de I'ombre ou de la
distortion le long de la marge int^rieure

Blank leaves added during restoration may
appear within the text. Whenever possible, these
have been omitted from filming/
II se peut que certaines pages blanches ajouttes
lors d'une restauration apparaissent dans le texte,
male, lorsque cela 4tait possible, ces pages n'ont
pas 6t^ fiim^es.

Additional comments:/
Commentaires suppl^mentaires;

L'instltut a microfilm^ le meilleur exempiaire
qu'il lui a ^tA possible de se procurer. Les details
de cet exempiaire qui sont peut-Atre uniques du
point de vue bibiiographique, qui peuvent modifier
uno image reproduite, ou qui peuvent exiger one
modification dans la methods normale de filmage
sont indiquAs ci-dessous.

n
n

Coloured pages/
Pages de couleur

Pages damaged/
Pages endommag^es

Pages restored and/or lam'nated/
Pages restaurtes et/ou pelliculAes

Pages discoloured, stained or foxed/
Pages dAcolories, tachetAes ou piqutes

Pages detached/
Pages dAtach6es

Showthrough/
Transparence

Quality of print varies/
Cui4lit6 InAgaie de I'lmpression

Includes supplementary material/
Comprend du materiel suppKmentaire

Only edition available/
Sttule Mitior disponible

Pages wholly or partially obscured by errata
slips, tissues, etc., have been refiimod to
ensure the best possible image/
Les pages totaloment ou partiellement
obscurcies par un feuillet d'errata, una pelure,
etc., ont At* filmAes k nouveau de fapon A
obtenir la meilleure image possible.

pe
of
fill

Oi
bs
th(

8i(

oti
fir
si<
or

Th
sh
Til
wl

Mi
d.l
en
be

rig
re(
m(

This item Is filmed at the reduction ratio checked below/

Ce document est film* au taux de reduction indiquA ci-dessous.

10X 14X 18X 22X

2BX

30X

12X

.16X

20X

24X

28X

32X

The copy filmed h«ra hat baan raproducad thanks
to tha ganarosity of:

Library of tha Public
Archivas of Canada

L'axamplaira filmA f ut raproduit grAca A la
gAnArosit* da:

iM bibiiothique das Archivas
pubiiquas du Canada

Tha imagas appearing hara ara tha bast quality
possibia considaring tha condition and laglbllity
of tha original copy ard in kaaping with tha
filming contract spacifications.

Original copias in printad papar ccvars ara fiimad
beginning with tha front covar and ending on
the last page with a printed or illustrated impres-
sion, or the back cover when appropriate. All
other original copies are filmed beginning on the
first page with a printed or illustrated impres-
sion, and ending on the las! page with a printed
or illustrsted impression.

The last recorded frame on each microfiche
shall contain the symbol ^^ (meaning "CON-
TINUED"), or tha symbol y (meaning "END"),
whichever applies.

Les images suivantes ont AtA reproduites svec le
plus grand soin. compta tenu de la condition at
da la nattet« de i'exempiaire film*, et en
conformity avac las conditions du contrat de
filmage.

Les exemplaires originaux dont ia couverture en
papier est imprimAe sent filmte en commenpant
par ia premier plat et er terminant soit par ia
darnlAre page qui comporte une empreinte
d'impression ou d'illustretion. soit par la second
plat, salon le cas. Tous ia» autras exemplaires
originaux sont fiimAs en commenpent par la
pramiire page qui comporte une empreinte
d'impression ou d'illustretion et en terminent par
la darnlAre page qcii comporte une telle
empreinte.

Un des symboles suivsnts apparattra sur ia
darnlAre image de cheque microfiche, selon le
cas: la symbols -^ signifie "A SUIVRE", le
symbols V signifie "FIN".

Maps, plates, charts, etc., may be filmed at
different reduction ratios. Those too large to be
entirely included in one exposure are filmed
beginning in the upper left hand corner, left to
right and top to bottom, as many frames as
required. The following diagrams illustrate the
method:

Les cartes, planches, tableaux, etc., peuvent Atre
filmAs A des taux de rAduction diff Arents.
Lorsquo le document est trop grand pour Atre
reproduit en un seul clichA, il est filmA A p&rtir
de I'engle supArieur gauche, de gauche A droite,
et de haut en bas, en prenant le nombre
d'imagas nAcessaire. Les diagrammas suivants
illustrent la mAthoda.

1 2 3

r.r.^c:

•<

\ 1

t^:

^J<^-'

COKHKSl'O.NDKNri-

BISIIOI' 01' \()\ A .SC0T1^\

l!l';Vi:i{l',M> (WON (0( llltAN. M. \..

I Ml ( 111 ■< .. rnri

IHS.MISSVI. (tK rili: l.Al'I'I'.l!

ri!(iM TllK l'*--ri'); ^ I. 1 IIAi:t.K 'iK

SALKM ('llAiM^L

HALIFAX. N. S.

st'f(f\n rniTiny

HALIFAX. N. S.:
LULNTLI) HV MACNAli vV SllAKFi;

^•y^';

.r^-^^

COrlBESPONDENCE

^arWXRM TKH

BISHOP OF NOVA SCOTIA

^KTV TH«

EEVEREND CANON COCHRAN, M. A.,

TOUCHING THB

DISMISSAL OF THE LATTER

FBOM THE PASTORAL OHi:»»« OP

SALEM CHAPEL,

HALIFAX, N. S.

BBGONH X9IIION.

HALIFAX, N. S. :

PRINTED BY MACNAB & &HAPEER,

1866.

POSTSCTvlTT.

Tho first odition of this " CDrrospondourp," consistinp:
of 1,000 oopios, being OKluuistcd. ;in(l anothor of tho sarao
extent e.illod for, I uvuil myself of tho opportniiitv to add
a fow linos in reply to nn nnprovoked jdhision to my case,
which the Editor of tiie Ci'iairh Chronirfc lias; <?one onf. of
his way to make, in liis '*• \n<^i dyinu; s])ooeh" contained in
the November number of tliat obscure monthly. I had no
controversy with him, and he would have done bettor not
to have meddled '' in other men's niattei's," nor dealt in
sarcastic remarks on the affair between the Bishop and
me. The style of those r<emarks is beneath criticism ;
their spirit is unbecomiui?; in a Junior clerii;yman when ad-
dressing one so much longer in the ministry. Whether I
have been '' entirely Avorsted" in my veccnt encounter with
the snperior j^owers, and whetlier " every one is either
laughing at or commiserating my defeat," I may safely
leave to the judgment of the reader, and to the fact of the
demand that has called foVth the present edition of the
correspondence. As to th(^ iMlitor's taunting allusion to
an expression in my brief note to the Bishop of Oct. 24,
(page 6) about his providing for the '• prcaddnr/' (only)
in Salem, on the two Sundays in tlie month on which, by
the new rule, the snrplice was to be worn in the pnlpit (the
black gown not being prohibited on the other Sundays, in
his LorcUhip's absence) — if the writer liad been candid
enough to notice my explanation, on page 8, he would
hardly have had the face to pen his second Avitticism about
the " smiles" caused by that proposal to his Lordship.

Moreover, this Editor says that my dismissal was not
an Episcopal act, but simply the act of '' any Rector."
But if he knew anything about the matter, he must know
that it was a disregard of an '' Episcopal" and not a Rec-
torial utterance, that was the " head and front of my of-
fending."* It may well be questioned, too, whether '' any
Rector" ^i; would be borne out in the dismissal of liis Curate
on such a pretence, if i^ had not been made a previous
condition of their mutual engagement.

December, 186G. ^ J. C. C.

♦ See Bishop's letter, p. 8.

1 My
l|28th' I

SdiscQ]

COimESPONDENCE.

To TUB Congregation of Salem Ciiai'el. • *

My dear fi'iendfi, — In ortler to correct any misapprehen-
sions respecting what has hitely occiii;^'ed between tho
Bishop ami myself, and to set tho matter in its true light,
I have thoiight it best (witli his Lordship's consent), and
more especially for your information, to print the entire
Correspoiiilence which has led to his dismissal of me from
tlie Chapel, in which I have ministered, in connexion with
himself, for more than eleven years.

You will accordingly find it in what follows. «•

» J. C. COCHRAN.

THE BISHOP TO MR. COCHRAN.

Halifax, 28th Sept., 186G.

My dear Sir, — I enclose $2, which Mr. Dyer requested
me to give you for the Deaf and Dumb Asylum, as I am
going to Windsor to-morrow, and have not yet had an op-
portunity of placing it in your hands.

I presume that you have understood from my Charge,
that the black gown can no longer ho used in 7ny Chapel.
It would be very strange, now that its use is prohibited
even by the military authorities, if it were to be seen there.

The Building Committee talk of mortgaging Trinity, but
it would be worthless as a security since the pews cannot
be let or sold. How the mone}'^ is to be raised I cannot tell.

Yours truly,

H. Nova Scotia.

MR. COCHRAN TO THE BISHOP.

Halifax, October 2, 1866.

My Lord, — I have received your Lcrdship's^ note of the
j28th Sept., and also the copy of your Lordship's charge,
for which I thank you. I notice your observations as to
discontinuing the use of the black gown at Salem, and I

trust T need not assure you, that I shall always receive,
with due deference, any sugp^estions coming from your
Lordship. But I feel certain tliat you have no desire to
force upon me anything whicli would do violence to my
feelings, o/ be misconstrued by the people to whom 1 min-
ister, or be at variance with the custom of the Church, in
these Provinces for more than a centur}'. Like the rest of
my brethren, I have worn the gown now for more than
forty-two years (nearly your Lordship's lifetime), more
than eleven of them in " your cliapeV* ; and in the short span
of life that may yet be allotted to me, I trust I may be
allowed quietly to go on as heretofore, and as most of
my brethren in the city and country are still doing. I
believe your Lordship is aware, that this does not proceed
from a mere aversion to change, but from conscientious
scruples, remembering that wearing the surplice in the
pulpit, was one of the earliest steps in that movement *
which has led so many of our clergy and people to Rome,
and is still producing those innovations in the mode of
worship in hundreds of our English Churches, which make
them hardly distinguishable from Roman Catholic Chapels.
I am persuaded that if I were to appear in a surplice in
Salem pulpit, it would be most offensive to the congrega-
tion, and would cause many to leave the Church. The
good rule of the late Archbishop of Canterbury would
seem to be best here as in England, namely — " to keep to
the gown, where that has been usually worn, or to the
other where the people have been accustomed to it" But,
without entering into any discussion of the matter, I
would simply rest upon that consideration for my personal
scruples and feelings, which I trust will be entertained
by your Lordship.

Yours respectfully,

J. C. Cochran.

THE BISHOP TO MR. COCHRAN.

Halifax, October 5, 1866.
My dear Sir, — I am sorry to find that you are of the
number of those who desire to wear vestments unautho-
rized by the Church of England, and I feel much difficulty
in replying to your note, for if I sanction the use of the
black gown m your case, I cannot prohibit the use of a

colored stole by any one who may think fit to wear it.
That the use of the surplice has been regarded as a party
badge is a glaring absurdity, for it has always been the
only vestment used (since its lirst adoption) in Cathedrals
and College Chapels, and mmany of the rwraZ Parishes in
England, where a change in the dress of the ofTleiating
minister would have been regarded as belonging to the
Romisii system rather than to ours. You may, perhaps,
not be aware of the fact, that the " ritualists" of the pre-
sent day discard the surplice altogether, having substituted
a very d liferent vestment under the same name. The ut-
most that I can do to meet your wishes is to refrain from
any enquiry as to what may be done when / am not pre-
sent; for you must perceive that having published my
Charge, I cannot, without gross inconsistency, sanction the
use of the black gown under any circumstances in my own
chapel, and at those times when the communion office is
used, whether there is any celebration or not, the sermon
must be preached in the surplice^ being a i)art of that office.
If you are afraid that it may be regjirded as a badge, you
will sufficiently prove that you do not so use it, if you
wear the black gown on other occasions. You cannot
surely desire to continue the absurd practice of making a
SECOND change, which becomes absolutely necessary when
the offertory sentences and prayer for the Church militant
are to be used, if the sermon has been preached in the
gown. I feel that I am placing myself in a false position
by even partial compliance with your request, but I am
anxious to meet your wishes to the utmost possible extent.

Yours truly,

II. Nova Scotia.

A personal interview followed, in whijh the matter was
discussed, and my objections to preach in the surplice
were repeated. I asked for more time for consideration,
and the Bishop agreed to take the pulpit himself on the
following Sunday (October 14), being Sacrament Sunday.
On the 21st, when no Communion Service was read, I
preached as usual in my gown. On the 23rd I received
the following note : —

Halifax, October 23, 186G.

My dear SiVy — You promised to let me know your inten-
tion respecting wearing the Huvplice, us required, at all
times of your ministrations. Please to let me know to-
morrow (Wednesday), in order that 1 may make my ar-
rangements accordingly for Sunday, whether you will
undertake to preach in your surplice on Sunday next, and
at all times when any portion of the Communion Service
is to be used in Salem Chapel, which is, according to my
rule, on every second Sunday.

Yours truly,

II. Nova Scotia.

I-

IMR.ICOCHRAN TO THE BISHOP.

Halifax, October 24, 1866.

tPMy Jjord, — I received your note last evening, and in
reply I beg very respectfully to say that I shall be glad if
you will kindly provide for the preachi ig at Salem on
Sunday morning next, [and on each alternate Sunday,
while wo remain there.

Yours respectfully,

J. C. Cochran.

THE BISHOP TO MR. COCHRAN.

Halifax, October 25, 1866.

My dear Sir, — I was very much surprised at receiving
your note last night, without any answer to the question
to which I desired, and to which you had promised to give
an answer. At considerable inconvenience to myself, I
changed my arrangements for the 14th to meet j'^our
wishes, and to give you more time for consideration about
a matter which ought not to have caused you a moment's
hesitation, and for the consideration of which you had
already had abundant opportunity, if time was required.
If it had been convenient to me to undertake the duty at
Salem, I should not have required your services there, and
it is difficult to believe that you can seriously request me
to " provide for the preaching " there, while you continue
to occupy the position of Minister or Curate, j

A,U>

ICvcry roasomiblo person will ndrnit that I have already
reached the utmost limits of coucession, and I am not
quite 8utis(led in my own conscience that I have not ovcr-
atepped them. I must therefore request you to let me
have a definite unmistakeable answer to my note of Tues-
day in the course of to-day (Thursday).

Yours truly,

II. Nova Scotia.

MR. COCHRAN TO THE BISHOP.

Halifax, Oct. 25th, 186G.

My Lord, — Having been engaged all the morning, and
at the Poor House all the afternoon, I could not answer
3'our note until this evening, I did not intend that you
should have any difficulty in making out my meaning. I had
already, ^otli verbally and by letter, stated my objections
to changing the practice of more than forty-two years in
my own case, and of centuries in the custom of the Church,
and now assuming a different dress in the pulpit, from
what I have so long worn, (and in your presence, for ele-
ven years) especially, as ncitlier in the rubric nor in your
charge is here any command to do so, nor any prohibition
to wear the black gown in preaching. Moreover, I stated
my belief, that such a change would be offensive to the
congregation, and finally, C \t the surplice having been
the well known badge of a ;arty in England, which h.
largely recruited the ranks of Rome, and is now convert
ing our English Churches by the score, into the appearance
of R. C. Chapels, — I felt that I could not allow myself to
be instrumental in the introduction of what may lead to
similar errors in forms and in doctrines, into this Diocese.
— I thought you had clearly understood these to be my
feelings, and my conscientious scruples, and I had certain-
ly hoped, that 3^ou would not have singled me out, for
attempted coercion, contrary to my feelings and convic-
tions.

But, if your Lordship desires anything plainer, I beg
distinctly to state, that I do not feel that I can properly
dssume the surplice in my pulpit ministrations in Salem.
When in my last note, I spoke of your providing for the
preaching at Salem on the Sundays indicated by you, 1

had reference to your own expression, that you wished "«a
knoio in time make your arrangements" which I sup-
posed meant for the supply of the pulpit on those days. —
You liave twice charged me with failing in my promise to
give an earlier answer. I have never mode such a pro-
mise as far as I can remember, but simply told you that I
should make up my mind before the Sunday came round.

Yours respectfully,

J. C. Cochran.

THE BISHOP TO Mil. COCHRAN.

Halifax, Oct. 26th, 1866.

My Dear Sir. — I sincerely regret that all my conces-
sions, and my endeavours to satisfy your scruples have
been in vain, and that you have finally determined to re-
fuse to conduct, in my Chapel^ the service according to the
rules of the Church, as they have been, ex cathedra, inter-
pretated by me. Of course, therefore, I have now no al-
ternative but to dispense with your assistance henceforth,
although I do so most reluctantly.

You are quite right in acting according to your con-
science, but you must permit me to observe that I cannot
understand the nature of that tenderness of conscience
which forbids you to conform to the rules of the Church,
enforced by competent authority (with respect to a thing
in icseZ/ perfectly indifferent), while you nevertheless desire
to retain oflice in that Church. I do not intend to discuss
the question of the propriety of one robe rather than ano-
ther, it is enough for us that the su plice is appointed,
both by the Canon and the "ubric, as the dress of the
minister in the ordinary services, and I have publicly given
my reasons for attaching importance to strict conformity
with the rules of the Church in these days. jSvery one
must perceive that if, having made that public statement, I
allow in my own Chapel, the use of one kind of unauthorized
vestments, I cannot honestly, or without gross injustice,
prohil?it the use of others such as some ministers consider
themselves bound in conscience to wear. You say that
you have worn the gown in my presence for eleven years.
This is true, because, although I have always objected to
the mummery of changing the dress, more es^ ecially on
Communion Sundays, I have allowed it to pass as a harm-

'J
n

led "ia
I sup-
ays.—
nise to
a pro-
that I
ound.

RAN.

866.

conccs-
s have
to re-
to <ihe
inter-
no al-
ieforth,

ir con-
cannot
science
Jliurch,
a thing
i desire
discuss
m ano-
ointed,
of the
'/ given
brmity
ry one
nent, I
lorized
ustice,
)nsider
y that
years,
ted to
My on
harm-

less folly, but since the v'tualists have made it necessary
to take up a position, which can ])e rationally and effec-
tually maintained against them, the crse is altered ; and
it is very strange that you did not immediately after the
delivery of the charge, either lay aside the black gown, or
notify your inability to contintie to officiate in my chapel.
' You say that I have singled you out for coercion, but
you must have so written without consideration, as you
are aware that I was willing to make such concessions to
yourself personally, as would have saved you from the pos-
sibility of incurring any of the suspicions which you so
iiuch dread.^ 1 have not given to yuu any diiections more
.han I have given to all the Clergy, respecting your pro-
ceedings m other places, but I require conformity in my
own chapel, from the officiating minister, whoever he may
be. Do you suppose that the Rector of St. Paul's or St.
George's would permit a Curate or assistant to perform
the service in the Church in a manner contrary to their
directions ? If they would not do so, how can you expect
me to permit the rules, which I have authoritati.ely ex-
pounded, to be systematically infringed in a chapol for
which I am absolutely and entirely responsible? Being
very unwilling to interfere with you, I have passed over
without notice several irregularities, of which 1 have heard
from time to time. I have heard that you have actually
sometimes read the offertory sentences, and the prayer for
the Church Militant, in your black gown, but this is such
a gross violation of the rules of the Church, that I cannot
receive the report as true, without further evidence.

I have already told you, that the ritualists have gener-
ally rejected our surplice, and that as our people are now
accustomed to see it worn, under orders from the Horse
Guards at the Garrison chapel, there can no longer be any
pretext for regarding it as the badge of a parti;. More-
over the responsibility rests with me, and not with you;
for supposing there was any doubt about the proper vest-
ment to be worn, the prayer book provides that — " For
the resolution of all doubts concerning the manner how to
understand, do, and execute the things contained in this
book, the parties that so doubt, or diversely take any-
thing, shall always res'^rt to the Bishop of the diocese,
who, by his discretion, shall take order for the quieting
and appeasing the same.

You speak, in your note last night, as if I ought to have

understood that you had made up your mind not to com-
ply with my injunctions ; but you know that you induced
me to take the sermon on the morning of the 14th, and to
allow you another week for consideration, on the plea that
owing to domestic troubles you had not been able to con-
eider the matter sufficiently.

However, the case is now perfectly clear, and notwith-
standing the very great inconvenience to me, I must
undertake the duties of Salem so long as I continue to
hold it. You will please to deliver the key of the chapel,
which I have entrusted to your care, to the bearer of this
letter, nnd some one shall attend there at 1 1 o'clock to-
morrow morning to enable you to remove anything belong-
ing to you. I think there are tioo old surplices belonging
to the chapel, and one belonging to yourself. You can
send any mone}-^ which you have received since the end of
September, with the account at the beginning of next
week. If you desire still to retain the charge of the poor
connected with the chapel, and will undertake to continue
this part of the ivork^ you can retain the balance of collec-
tions at the celebration of the Holy Communion, and I
will still hand to you for distribution the collections which
may be taken on such occasions.

Again, assuring you that it is with extreme reluctance
that I yield to the necessity under which you have placed
me, and praying that you may be guided with wisdom
from above.

I remain yours, truly,

H. I^ovA Scotia.

MR. COCHRAN TO THE BISHOP.

Halifax, October 29, 1866.

My Lord, — I found your letter of the 26th, containing
my dismissal from Salem, oii my table, when I returned
to my house on that morning, and the key of the church
gone, so that I was actually turned out before I knew it.
A house-servant generally gets a longer notice when re-
quired to quit a master's service. Whether the oldest
officiating clergyman in the diocese (with one exception)
was entitlisd to as much courtesj', let others judge. I con-
sider it a harsh and arbitrary proceeding, thus, by a stroke

oftbepcii, to sever me from my congregation, which I
had raised up, and served for more than eleven years, and
I hope, not without some success. In reply to your last,
let me observe that the grounds of your action are at least
questionable. You say that because it is your chapel in
which I have been officiating, I must conform to your
directions albout the surplice. But is the cha[)el yours ?
True your name appears as .the lessee, but the congrega-
tion pay the rent, with occasional deficiency indeed, which,
however, you regularly call upon the people to make up.
Thus it would appear that they, and not your Lordship,
have a right to the building for the time being. If so,
what you consider j'our strongest ground would vanish.

Your Lordship has repeatedly spoken of the Canons,
rules of the Church, and rubric requiring preaching to be
dqjie in the surplice. As to the former, I believe it is
generally allowed that they have no force here. If they
have I fear your Lordship (;ven would be found breaking
some of them. And as to the latter, I can find no rubric
touching the matter, from which more than a doubtful
inference can be drawn. But if you have such canons,
rules, or rubrics, please to let me see them. Again, you
dwell mi'^h on the charge of inconsistency to which you
would be liable, if you allowed the gown in your own (?)
chapel, when j'our Charge is against it. But I can find
nothing more than this in that document — "You are
aware that the use of the black gown, when you are offici-
ating, is as much unauthorized as any of the gorgeous vest-
ments lately adopted, but your proper robe, the white
linen betokening* the righteousness of the saints, whicli
you ought to wear at all times of j^cur ministration, is the
emblem of purity," &c. This may be strained into a re-
ccmniendation, but certainly is no general order to wear
the one robe, or give up the other ; especially as you had
just before stated that the custom of the Church for three
hundred years ought to be regarded, and it is safe to say
that the black gown can plead such custom in its favor,
both at home and in America, from its earliest settlement.

You say too that if you allow the gown to be used in
Salem, you cannot honestlj' prohibit the use of other
robes, suph as some ministers may consider themselves
bound to wear. But surely there is a vast difference be-
tween the introduction of new and oflfensive changes —
gre6n, blue, red, or white, and the continued use of the

Hi:

solemn black, worn for centuries past. In allusion to my
remark, that I have worn the gown in 3'our presence for
more than eleven years, }ou say you have always objected
to the mummery of changing the dress from white to black,
and call it a harmless folly, but you never objected but
once, when some delay arose in the arrival of my gown,
and you urged me to assume the surplice, which I promptly
declined. And as to the mummery of the business, which
you condemn in one place you uphold in another, finding
fault with me, because, as you heard, I have on a few
occasions, read the sentences in my gown, in order to
avoid the said mummery of resuming the surplice. You
tell me that I wrote without consideration, when I said
3'ou singled me out for coercion. Your Lordship is in
error. I repeat the charge, and ask you to name the se-
cond clergyman to whom you have applied the screw.

Your Lordship frequently refers contemptuously to^he
*' Ritualists," but I would ask, what is this whole matter
about whicli such a stir is made, but " llitualistic." You
seem to think that the order from the Horse Guards in
March, 1865, to Military Chaplains, and the practice at
the Garrison Chapel in reference to the surplice, are con-
clusive in favor of your argument ; but it may well be
asked what have the Horse Guards to do with Salem
Chapel? Or, what should make the Garrison Chapel our
rule now, for the white, any more than it was during the
incumbency of the late excellent chaplain and his prede-
cessor for the black, which they both wore during the fifty
years of their united service. As to 3'our reference to the
preface in the Prayer Book, which you have rescued from
oblivion, and which directs that doubts are to be solved
by the Bishop, it must be noted that it only refers to things
contained in that Book, and it will not be easy to find sur-
plice or gown mentioned among these things. You speak
of the " great concessions " you have made to me in this
matter. I am aware of none, except that j'ou said you
would ask no questions as to what I might wear behind
your back, if 1 could only put on the surplice on the Sun-
daj's when you might be present — a course which I could
not reconcile with Christian simplicity and manliness, and
therefore declined to follo^y.

You frequently assert that the color of the robe is of no
consequence in itself. Then why make it so, and stop my
ministration of the Word and Sacraments in my accus-

trl^

tomefl placo, thus hindering the great work of the salva-
tion of souls, and offending numbers of our people. Let
me also add here, the ver}' obvious and pertinent question
which is asked on all sides. If it is so wrong to wear the
gown and preach in it now, why has it been so long al-
lowed, and why not banished from St. PulI's, St. George's
Dartmouth, and scores of other churches in the diocese ?
Nay, it has been asked why did 3'our Lordship wear it,
when preaching in St. Paul's on Good Friday?

But I have done, and heartily wish j'ou had not forced
upon me the necessity of this unpleasant coirespondoncc.

" Seek peace and ensue it," is a precept I would i'ain
obey. Upon you. My Lord, rests the heavy responsibility
of interrupting ray pastoral connection with my beloved
flock and my dear Sabbath School children, and it may
be of driving many, old and 3'oung, from the Church we
ought to love. I pray God this may not be laid to your
charge. I was early trained to reverence for authority,,
civil and ecclesiastical, and it is very painful to me to be
thus forced by your Lordship into collision with such au-
thority. But, painful as it is, my conscience will not
rtUow me to be driven to an act, from which consequences
may follow, destructive of the purity of the doctrines, and
the ordinances of that Reformed branch of the Church of
Christ, in which we both are ministers, and whose integ-
rity we are so solemnly bound to maintain. In my sixty-
ninth year, and the forty-third of my ministr}', I ought to
remember that the Day of account is at hand. I am re-
solved, God being my helper, that I shall not have to
reflect at the last, among my other sins, on being instru-
mental in introducing here, what has led in the mother
church to such wide-spread " false doctrine, heresy and
schism," and is still rending her communion to a fearful
extent.

That the " little cloud " which may be seen in our own
ecclesiastical horizon, perhaps just now not bigger than a
man's hand, may not be permitted to increase, so as to
involve our Colonial Church in similar dangers, is the
prayer of , Very respectfully,

Your Lordship's faithful Presbyter,

J. C. Cochran,

P. S. — To set matters in their proper light, and prevent
misapprehension, I shall probably issue a Circular to my
people, containing our present correspondence.

I had hoped tha^ this would have closed the irksome
corrcspondenee, but on the 2nd November I received the
followinj:^ long letter, chiefly a repetition of former state-
ments already refuted by me. On the " new matter " I feel
it necessary to append a few explanatory remarks.

Li :

. THE BISHOP TO MR. COCHRAN.

Halifax, Nov. 1st, 1866.

Doar Sir, — Having in my letter of the 26th ult. clearly
explained my reasons for the step which I most reluctant-
ly took, when I determined to forego the convenience of
your assistance in my chapel, 1 do not think it necassary
to answer at any great length yours of 29th, except so far
as it contains or suggests new matter ; but there are some
passages in it which cannot be passed over without notice.
You complain that you had not sufficient notice that your
services would no longer be required in " Salem," but I
answer that you were informed, in my letter of the 5th, of
my views, of the utmost extent of the concessions which I
could make, and of my definite decision respecting the
conduct of the services in my chapel. You had therefore,
at the least, three weeks, in which to prepare for the inev-
(table result, which j'^ou must have contemplated, unless,
indeed, j^ou sujjposed that I would be so wavering as to
change my mind, after writing the letter, or so weak as to
permit you in ony own Chapel to preach when you please,
undertaking the burden of making other arrs.ngements for
the sermons at other times.

I have moreover to remind you that j'ou have not been
*' suspended" and to call upon you to contradict the false
reports that are circulated respecting your present posi-
tion, since I have not in any way interfered with your sa-
lary or with your action in other places. I have informed
you that if you continue to perform the duties outside of
the chapel, I will recognize the performance of those acts
so that you w^ill receive your salary without any diminu-
tion. I have in fact merely said to you what any incum-
bent may say in reference to the services in the Churches
under his care, that he will not permit any one to officiate
in them in a manner of which he disapproves.

With respect to my rights in Salem Chapel which you
so strangel}' impugn, you know that I opened, and have
kept open, that Chapel, for the benefit of the poor and
strangers, entirely on my oivn responsibility, being answer-
abie for every expense attending it, (with tlie exception of
your salary paid by the English Government,) that instead
of an "occasional deiiciency," as stated by you, I have
had to pay more or less every year, and that kucIi deficien-
cies have not been made up by the people, lint the
allegation that a congregation contributing to a voUintary
collection at the end of each service, thereby acquire any
rights in the building in which they are assembled, is really
too absurd to require refutatiqn.

You ought to be aware that the Canons of 1000 are
binding upon the Clergy of the Church of England, and
may be enforced at any time, when not repealed by later
enactments, at the discretion of the Bishop. You ought
to be acquainted with them, but at your request I quote
the 67th Canon : " Every Minister saying the public
prayers, or ministering the Sacraments, or other rites of
the Church, shall wear a comely and decent surplice with
sleeves, and if any question arise touching the matter, de-
cency, or comeliness thereof, the same shall be decided by
the discretion of the Ordinary," i.e., the Bishop.* The
rubric for which you ask is immediately before the orders
for Morning Prayer in eve^y Prayer Book. Y"ou quote
from my Charge, and I cannot imagine a conscientious
man requiring any more positive injunction than a notifi-
cation that a particular vestmont is unauthorized, and that
another is strictly according to rule.

You have evidently failed to perceive that the *' cus-
tom," to which I referred, differs materially from that
upon which you reply. Th former is univerml — none of
the vestments to which I alluded, except die cope, having
been worn in any branch of the Church of England, but
there is no such custom in favor of the black gown. If
we are members of the Church of England, we must be

"* Even supposing the Canons to be in force, this one does not
touch the point. It says nothing about preaching, which is not a
**rite " of the Church. Nobody questions the use of the surplice in
other parts of the Service, and the rubric to which the Bishop re-
fers is also silent as to the color of the vestments. If we are to
bring out those worn in the reign of Edward VI. (A. D., 1550), wo
may next be required to appear in green, as some of the Clergy in
England do now. — (J.C.C)

giiided by the practice at home, and not by the accidents
of a new country ; and the black gown has never baen
■worn there in the model churches (viz. tho cathedrals,) nor
in several rural churches, and from early childhood I have
seen my Father preach in hin surplice^ when the offertory
sentences were to be read after the sermon.

I perfectly remember the occasion mentioned by you,
when, to my great astonishment, you kept the congrega-
tion waiting some minutes,* rather than enter the pulpit in
your surplice, thus attaching a very exaggerated import-
ance to the color or shape of your dress. I am sorry to
find, upon further investigation, that not only " on a few
occasions," but ordinarily ,t when I v:as not present^ you
read the sentences and the following prayer in your black
gown, thus violating the custom no less than the rules of
the Church.

I leave to others to judge, after reading my letter of
2Gth ult., of the truth of the charge that I have *' singled
you out for coercion." You are the minister who hap-
pened to be ofTiciating for me in my own chapel, where, as
a matter of course, I have required conformity to rule,
without reference to a particular person who may at any
time be the preacher.

I thought the meaning of the term *' ritualists," as now
commonly used, was understood by every one, although I
admit that, strictly speaking, there is " ritualism" in the
proceedings of every body of men who, when assembled
together, desire to " do all things decently and io order."

Your remark about the Garrison Chapel is very unfortu-
nate for your case, since we actually did adhere >to the
black gown as long as the military authorities did so, but
since they have disused it, my argument is, that a fortiori
it ought to be discarded in the Bishop's Chapel. You
have omitted the important zvords of the quotation from the
preface of the prayer book, which refers to the Bishop all
doubts " concerning the manner how to understand, do,
and execute the things contained in the book," and this
surely includes the vestments to be worn when doing or
cicecw^iwgr these things.

You have misapprehended my meaning in the conces- '
sions which I made out of deference to your age and
scruples. I intended to inform you that when the Com-

* About half a minute.

t Misinformed.

munion Sorviro was to be read (twice in each month) the
sermon must be preached in the surplice, to avoid needless
charpfe, whotiier I might be present or iibscnt, but that 1
would absent myself at other times, leaving you to
please yourself, although I could not sanction a violation
of the rule by my presence.

I repeat that I attach no importance to the color of the
robe (although white is always in Scripture associated
with purity and righteousness), but I do attach import-
ance to conformity to order, in small things and great.
Moreover it should be i derstood that tlie question is not
whether ])lack or white shall be assumed., but whether the
minister having on a rStiite robe at the beginning of the
service, shall afterwards exchange it for black or any other
color. The Bishop never changes his robes during the
service, whv then should any other minister do so ?

You speak of " hindering the great work of, the salva-
tion of souls," by stopping your ministration in the chapel.
Do you really mean that those who may occupy the pulpit
in your stead will not carry on the same work ?

Your next question is fidly answered in my letter, of
26th, where I give the reason for enforcing rules formerly
dormant, and explained the distinction between m.y own
chapel and other churches.

I am glad to learn that you mean to attend to the pre-
cept " seek peace and ensue it," for in that case j'ou will
not repeat the singularly offensive proceeding of last Sun-
day, to which you were probably urged by bad advisers,
and of which 1 hope that you have now repented. Your
presence in the most conspicuous seat, robed as you were,
could not possibly tend to peace, nor to the promotion of
a spirit of devotion in the congregation, whose minds
must have been disturbed, whatever their sentiments may
have been, respecting yourself. With regard to the few
persons wlio offered an insult to their God by coming to
the place where prayer is wont to be made, and quitting
it without taking part in the worship, or listening to the
preaching of His word, I must remind you that such con-
duct is utterly without excuse, in apnvate chapel, where,
they are invited to come to worship and to hear, without
any claim on their part to have such provision made for
them. You must surely perceive that, whether their con-
duct was instigated by you or not, you are seriously
compromised by it ; for they have been long under your

leaching and influence, and if they have not learned how
to behave in tlio liouse of prayer, and are irritated by con-
formity to the rules of the Cluii'cii, of which tliey arc pro-
fessedly members, you cannot have instructed them aright.
You profess much anxiety for *' the purity of tlie doctrine
and ordinances of the reformed branch of the Church of
Christ, of which we both are ministers." All men can
judge whether this purity is most likely to be preserved
by the strict conformity in all points on which I insist, or
by your determination to decide for yourself how far you
will conform.

I do not understand your statement that " the fund
owes you £4 or £5." I know of no *' ftind." You have
had, for distribution to the sick and needy, the communion
alms witJiout accounting to me for the disposal of them. If
you have given more I presume that you have given from
other sources, or of your own substance, as every Chris-
tian does. You have not remitted me the amount of ordi-
nary collections received since 31st ult. You are at
liberty to publish the correspondence, provided you pub-
lish the whole of it, as I desire that what has passed be-
tween us may be generally known.

I am, my dear Sir,

Yours truly,

H. Nova Scotia.

Unwilling to continue the correspondence, I did not re-
ply to this last letter, though it afforded sufficient material
for remark. But I cannot pass over that portion of it which
broadly intimates that I am to be classed with those who
have, in his Lordship's opinion, *' offered insult to their
God," by leaving the chapel on not seeing me in the pul-
pit. If such a charge had come from any other quarter, I
should have had no difficulty in designating it as the
gravest, the most unprovoked, and the most unjustifiable
accusation that one clergyman could invent against another.
As it is, I leave it to be answered by those who have known
me during my life-long ministry here and elsewhere. On
the occasion in question, I certainly did attend in Salem
chapel, and in my "black" gown, (not having been de-

privo<l of it.; borfiuso T thought I ii\i«j:}it ho allowod to nay
my prayers ^ aloiijr with my people, ifl could not ho por-
niittod to proaoh to thoni ; and I sat just uhero I thought
host. romoinl)orinf; that tlio chapol is froo ovon to thf»
poorest outoast. I liavo reason to icnow tliat my proseno(*
hnd a more restraininiij inlhienoe on my poo]>le than
wonl'l hnve heon produeed hy my ahsonce. As to th<» had
teaehin»T with whieh I am ehai'ijji'd, I may atjain safely
leave that to the jndfrmont of those who have sat under my
ministry, and many ol' whom can testiiy that ! coun-
selled qnietn(»ss, and peaee, and order, in the tryincf oir-
cnmstances which have heen forced upon them. In refer-
ence to certain reports allude<l to in this last letter, as
heinp; in circulation, my time as a Minister of Christ would
be poorly employed in tracing them to theij- tale-hearinpj
authors, who are probably the same that busied themselves
in counting:!; the number of times that I did not chan^]:©
from the black vestment to the white.

Perhaps it may be as well to explain the Bishop's allu-
sion to n\on€\y matters. Tlie '• fund " means the Sacra-
mental collections for the ]ioor and distressed, snvill in
amount in proportion to the number of applicants. As \
never turned any one away from my door because I might
not have money in hand from that source, I am generally
in advence, as at the present time.. For the distribution
of these alms, lam accoiintablo to no man.

But I will close, having now placed in your hands an
account of the whole transaction. You v;ill now see that
the question is not merely between black and white, but
that a great principle is involved, namely, whether I could
as a minister of the Reformed Church of England, raise
here that flag under whieli so many of her recreant sons,
both lay and clerical, have deserted to that very quarter
from which our martyred forefathers came out, in the face
of persecution, even unto death. Believing, as I consci-
entiously do, that from similar beginnings here, Bimilar

remits may be found to follow in the course of time, I
felt constrained to take my fltondf humbly but firmly, on
the right side, and to refuse to lend my aid, however small,
to an}' departure (Vom the well-known practice of the
Church of England, at home and abioad, for centuries
paHt, — and for which departure, I can find neither rubric,
rule, or canon, although I have acccHS to the best autliori-
ties in such matters. The black gown is not only gene-
rally worn in picaoiiing by the parochial clergy in Eng-
land, Ireland, Scotland and America, but even in the Ca-
thedrals of Quebec, Toronto, ^nd Huron, in Canada. Nay,
if I am correctly informed, even the Lord Bishop of New-
foundland, certainly not a veiy Low Churchman, ha» used
it in some of his preachings, both in that island and in
Bermuda. Then why, it may be asked, have such a cru-
sade against it here, where it has never committed any
otfence that I know of, deserving of banishment, but where
its white rival, if I mistake not, will not 1)0 so quietly
t-olerated. Hopmg that you will all continue to love, and
lo reverence the Church of your fathers, and jealously
guard the simplicity and purity of her worship, and above
all to grow in grace and the knowledge of your Lord and
Saviour, so that we may all meet where jarring opinions
and "" vain janglings " will cease, is the fervent prayer of

Your affectionate Pastor,

J. C. COCHEAN.

ybvernbier, 1866.

;!1

imo, I
ly> on
' smalU
of the
nturies
rubric,
Lutliori-
^ gviie-
n Eng-
the Ca-
Nay,
►f New-
ka» used

and in
11 aera-
ted any
it where

quietly
)ve, and
ealouBly
id above
^ord and
opinions
jrayer of

:ran.

.•V