BX 5017 .A2 C5 1880 
 Church of England. Province I 
 of Canterbury. Convocation.. 
 The Chronicle of Convocation! 
 
CaWYerWrv (lVc3V\hc£j Cnnooca'tloln , \&80 
 
 CHRONICLE OF CONVOCATION, 
 
 DICING 
 
 A RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS 
 CONVOCATION OF CANTERBURY, 
 
 THE TENTH VICTORIA REGNANTE. 
 
 SESSIONS, April :V); June 1, 2, 3, 4, 1880. 
 
 RIVINGTONS, 
 S, WATERLOO TLACE, LONDON; 
 
 14, MAGDALEN STREET, OXFORD; 
 16, TRINITY STRF.f.T, CAMBRIDGE. 
 
 1880. 
 
TABLE OF CONTENTS. 
 
 Prorogations and Dissolution Page 3 
 
 List of Members 5 
 
 Assembling of the New Convocation 12 
 
 Election of Prolocutor 16 
 
 Presentation of Prolocutor 21 
 
 Petitions 25, 36, 46, 57, 81, 86, 105 
 
 Address to the Queen 25, 42, 81, 88 
 
 Reform of Convocation 29, 58 
 
 Public-house Closing 29 
 
 Family Prayer 32, 109 
 
 Church in Liberia 33 
 
 The late Prolocutor 34, 69, 87 
 
 Notices of Motion 34, 58, 85, 112 
 
 Standing Orders 35 
 
 Finances 36, 85, 113 
 
 Reports of last Convocation | ^nd Appendix 
 
 Committees, Guidance of 37 
 
 Committees, Appointment of 38 
 
 Prayer-book 46 
 
 Education iu the East 47 
 
 Visitation Fees 48 
 
 Lay- Deacons and Lay- Readers 54 
 
 Burials Bill 69, 88, 112, '13, '27 
 
 Gravamina 86 
 
 Facilities for Business 105, '11 
 
 Harvest Service 113 
 
P-EIHCETOH 
 J . REC. APR i»8l 
 
 \theqlogic&l/ 
 CHRONICLE OF CONVOCATION. 
 
 CONVOCATION OF THE PROVINCE OP CANTERBURY 
 THE NINTH VICTORIA REGNANTE. 
 1879. 
 
 BOARD-ROOM OF THE BOUNTY-OFFICE. 
 Session XCV.— Saturday, August 16, 1879. 
 By virtue of a Royal Writ, dated the 14th inst., and directed to 
 his Grace the President, and of a Commission under the Archi- 
 episcopal Seal of his Grace, directed to the Right Hon. and 
 Right Rev. John, Lord Bishop of London, this Convocation was 
 by him, the said Lord Bishop, continued and prorogued to and until 
 Monday, the 3rd day of November next ensuing, to a certain Upper 
 Chamber, commonly called the Board-room, in the Bounty-office, 
 situated in Dean's Yard, Westminster. 
 
 BOARD-ROOM OF THE BOUNTY-OFFICE. 
 Session XCVL— Monday, November 3, 1879. 
 By virtue of a Royal Writ, dated the 28th ult., addressed to his 
 Grace the President, the Convocation was by his Grace continued 
 and prorogued to and until Saturday, the 20th day of December 
 next ensuing, to a certain Upper Chamber, called the Board-room, 
 in the Bounty-office, situated in Dean's Yard, Westminster. 
 
 BOARD-ROOM OF THE BOUNTY-OFFICE. 
 Session XCVIL— Saturday, December 20, 1879. 
 
 By virtue of a Royal Writ, dated the 15th inst., addressed to his 
 Grace the President, and of a Commission under the Archiepiscopal 
 Seal of his Grace, addressed to the Right Worshipful James Parker 
 Deane, Doctor of Laws, his Vicar-General, the Convocation was by 
 him, the said Vicar- General, continued and prorogued to and until 
 Friday, the 6th day of February next ensuing, to a certain Upper 
 Chamber, commonly called the Board-room of the Bounty-office, 
 situated in Dean's Yard, Westminster. 
 
 B 2 
 
4 
 
 BOARD-ROOM OF THE BOUNTY-OFFICE. 
 Session XCVIIL— Friday, February G, 1880. 
 The Convocation was continued and prorogued by Lis Grace the 
 President to and until Tuesday, the 20th day of April next ensuing, 
 to a certain Upper Chamber, commonly called the Board- room ol 
 the Bounty-ofiice, situated in Dean's Yard, Westminster. 
 
 BOARD-ROOM OF THE BOUNTY-OFFICE. 
 Session XOIX.— Wednesday, March 24, 1880. 
 By virtue of a Royal Writ, bearing date this day, directed to his 
 Grace the President, and of a Commission under the Archiepiscopal 
 Seal, directed to the Right Worshipful James Parker Deanc, Doctor of 
 Laws, his Vicar-General, this Convocation was by him, the said 
 Vicar-General, duly dissolved in conformity with ancient practice 
 according to the tenor of such Writ. 
 
LIST OF MEMBERS. 
 
 5 
 
 CONVOCATION OF THE PROVINCE OF 
 CANTERBURY, 
 
 THE TENTU VICTORIA B EG N ANTE. 
 1880. 
 
 The following Bishops, Deans, Archdeacons, and Proctors con- 
 stitute the present Convocation of the Southern Province: — 
 
 UPPER HOUSE. 
 The Right Honourable and Most Rev. Archibald Campbell Tait, 
 
 D.D., Archbishop of Canterbury, President. 
 The Right Hon. and Right Rev. John Jackson, D.D., Bishop of 
 
 Loudon. 
 
 The Right Rev. Edward Harold Browne, D.D., Bishop of Win- 
 chester. 
 
 The Right Rev. James Colquhoun Campbell, D.D., Bishop of 
 Bangor. 
 
 The Right Hon. and Right Rev. Lord Arthur Charles Hcrvcy, 
 
 D.D., Bishop of Bath and Wells. 
 The Right Rev. Richard Durnford, D.D., Bishop of Chichester. 
 The Right Rev. James Russell Woodford, D.D., Bishop of Ely. 
 The Right Rev. Frederick Temple, D.D., Bishop of Exeter. 
 The Right Rev. Charles John Ellicott, D.U., Bishop of Gloucester 
 
 and Bristol. 
 
 The Right Rev. James Atlay, D.D., Bishop of Hereford. 
 The Right Rev. William Dalrymplc Maclagan, U.D., Bishop of 
 Lichfield. 
 
 The Right Rev. Christopher Wordsworth, D.D., Bishop of Lincoln. 
 The Right Rev. Alfred Ollivant, D.D., Bishop of Llandaff. 
 The Hon. and Right Rev. John Thomas Pelham, D.D., Bishop of 
 Norwich. 
 
G 
 
 LIST OF MEMBERS. 
 
 The Right Rev. Jolm Fielder Mackarness, D.D., Bishop of Oxford. 
 The Right Rev. William Connor Magee, D.D., Bishop of Peter- 
 borough. 
 
 The Right Rev. Anthony Wilson Thorold, D.D., Bishop of 
 
 Rochester. 
 
 The Right Rev. George Moberly, D.D., Bishop of Salisbury. 
 The Right Rev. Joshua Hughes, D.D., Bishop of St. Asaph. 
 The Right Rev. William Basil Jones, D.D., Bishop of St. David's. 
 The Right Rev. Henry Philpott, D.D., Bishop of Worcester. 
 The Right Rev. Thomas Legh Claughton, D.D., Bishop of St. 
 Alban's. 
 
 The Right Rev. Edward White Benson, D.D., Bishop of Truro. 
 
 LOWER HOUSE. 
 
 Canterhury — 
 The Very Rev. R. Payne Smith, D.D., Dean. 
 
 The Right Rev. Edward Parry, D.D., Bishop- Suffragan of Dover, 
 
 Archdeacon of Canterbury. 
 The Vcn. Benjamin Harrison, M.A., Archdeacon of Maidstone. 
 The Rev. Canon George Rawlinson, M.A., Proctor for Chapter. 
 The Rev. Canon H. A. Jeffreys, M.A.,| Proctors for the two 
 The Rev. Canon J. Puckle, M.A., ) Archdeaconries. 
 
 London — 
 
 The Very Rev. R. W. Church, M.A., Dean of St. Paul's. 
 The Very Rev. A. P. Stanley, D.D., Dean of Westminster. 
 The Right Rev. Bishop Piers Claughton, D.D., Archdeacon of 
 London. 
 
 The Ven. James Augustus Hessey, D.C.L., Archdeacon of Middlesex. 
 The Ven. J. Jennings, M.A., Archdeacon of Westminster. 
 The Rev. Canon R. Gregory, M.A., Proctor for the Chapter of St. 
 Paul's. 
 
 The Rev. Canon George Prothero, M.A., Proctor for the Chapter 
 
 of Westminster. 
 The Rev. Prebendary M. Gibbs, M.A.") 
 
 Tl^RTvTrebendary G. H. Wilkinson, ( Pr0G *° rfl te tbe Clergy ' 
 M.A., ) 
 
LIST OF MEMBERS. 
 
 7 
 
 Winchester— 
 The Very Rev. John Brainston, CD., Dean. 
 
 The Ven. Pefcer Wrighton Atkinson, M.A., Archdeacon of Surrey. 
 
 The Ven. Philip Jacob, M.A., Archdeacon of Winchester. 
 
 The Right Rev. Francis Thomas McDougall, D.C.L., Archdeacon of 
 the Isle of Wight. 
 
 The Rev. Canon Thomas Walpole, M.A., Proctor for the Chapter. 
 
 The Rev. Canon G. H. Sumner, M.A., Proctor for the Arch- 
 deaconry of Winchester. 
 
 The Rev. Canon J. H. Sapte, M.A., Proctor for the Archdeaconry 
 of Surrey. 
 
 Banrjor — 
 
 The Very Rev. Henry Thomas Edwards, M.A., Dean. 
 
 The Ven. J. Wynne Jones, M.A., Archdeacon of Bangor. 
 
 The Ven. J. Evans, M.A., Archdeacon of Merioneth. 
 
 The Rev. Canon Thomas Briscoe, D.D., Proctor for the Chapter. 
 
 Tho Rev. Philip Constable Ellis, M.A.,) Proctors for the Clergy of 
 
 The Rev. David Walter Thomas, M.A.,) the Diocese. 
 
 Bath and Wells— 
 The Very Rev. G. H. S. Johnson, M.A., Dean. 
 
 The Ven. George Anthony Denison, M.A., Archdeacon of Taunton. 
 
 The Ven. R. W. Browne, M.A., Archdeacon of Bath. 
 
 The Ven. A. G. Fitzgerald, M.A., Archdeacon of Wells. 
 
 The Rev. Thomas Dehany Bernard, M.A. (Precentor), Proctor for 
 
 the Chapter. 
 The Rev. Prebendary Edwin ^ 
 
 Arthur Salmon, M.A., / Proctors for the Clergy of the 
 The Rev. Prebendary A. C. ( Diocese. 
 
 Ainslie, M.A., ) 
 
 Chichester — 
 
 The Very Rev. John William Burgon, B.D., Dean. 
 The Ven. John Russell Walker, M.A., Archdeacon of Chichester. 
 Tho Ven. John Hannah, D.C.L., M.A., Archdeacon of Lewes. 
 The Rev. Canon C. A. Swainson, D.D., Proctor for the Chapter. 
 The Rpv. Prebendary E. Heathcote Campion, M.A., Proctor for the 
 
 Clergy of the Archdeaconry of Chichester. 
 The Rev. Prebendary Richard William Wood Stephens, M.A., 
 
 Proctor for the Clergy of the Archdeaconry of Lewes. 
 Ely — 
 
 The Very Rev. C. Merivalo, D.D., Dean. 
 The Ven. W. Emery, B.D., Archdeacon of Ely. 
 The Ven. F. Bathurst, M.A., Archdeacon of Bedford. 
 The Ven. F. R. Chapman, M.A., Archdeacon of Sudbury. 
 The Ven. Francis Gerald Vesey, LL.D., Archdeacon of Huntingdon. 
 The Rev. Canon Edward Clarke Lowe, D.D., Proctor for the 
 Chapter. 
 
8 
 
 LIST OF MEHBERS. 
 
 Ely — continued. 
 
 The Rev. Canon W. B. Hopkins, M.A.,) Proctors for the Clergy of 
 The Rev. Canon J. P. Birkett, M.A., J the Diocese. 
 
 Exeter — 
 
 The Very Rev. Archibald Boyd, D.D., Dean. 
 The Ven. Henry Sanders, M.A., Archdeacon of Exeter. 
 The Ven. Alfred Earle, M.A., Archdeacon of Totnes. 
 The Ven. H. Woollcombe, M.A., Archdeacon of Barnstaple. 
 The Rev. E. C. Harington, M.A. (Chancellor), Proctor for the 
 Chapter. 
 
 The Rev. Prebendary Michael Ferribec^ 
 
 Sadler, M.A., / Proctors for the Clergy 
 
 The Rev. Prebendary James Cory Kerupe, I of the Diocese. 
 
 M.A., J 
 
 Gloucester and Bristol — 
 The Very Rev. Henry Law, M.A., Dean of Gloucester. 
 The Very Rev. Gilbert Elliot, D.D., Dean of Bristol. 
 The Ven. Sir George Prcvost, M.A., Archdeacon of Gloucester. 
 The Ven. H. G. Randall, M.A., Archdeacon of Bristol. 
 The Rev. Canon R. Harvey, M.A., Proctor for the Chapter of 
 Gloucester. 
 
 The Rev. Canon John Pilkington Norris, B.D., Proctor for the 
 
 Chapter of Bristol. 
 The Rev. H. R. Hay ward, M.A., ) Proctors for the Clergy of 
 The Rev. Canon J. J. Barlow, M.A., / the Diocese. 
 
 Hereford— 
 
 The Hon. and Very Rev. G. Herbert, M.A., Dean. 
 The Ven. Lord Saye and Sole, D.C.L., Archdeacon of Hereford. 
 The Ven. Richard Maddison, M.A., Archdeacon of Ludlow. 
 The Rev. Sir Frederick A. Gore Ouscley, Bart., M.A., Proctor for 
 the Chapter. 
 
 The Rev. Henry Wright Phillott, M.A., Proctor for the Clergy 
 
 of the Archdeaconry of Hereford. 
 The Rev. Edward Ffarington Clayton, M.A., Proctor for the 
 
 Clergy of the Archdeaconry of Salop. 
 
 Lichfield — 
 
 The Very Rev. Edward Bickcrstcth, D.D., Dean. 
 
 The Ven. John Allen, M.A., Archdeacon of Salop. 
 
 The Ven. John Hodgson Res, D.D., Archdeacon of Stafford. 
 
 The Ven. E. Balston, D.D., Archdeacon of Derby. 
 
 The Ven. Sir Lovelace Tomlinson Stamer, Bart., M.A., Archdeacon 
 
 of Stoke-on-Trent. 
 The Rev. Prebendary E. J. J. G. Edwards, M.A., Proctor for the 
 
 Chapter. 
 
 The Rev. Prebendary Edward Henry ~) „ , , 
 
 Abney, B.A., ( P'oetors for the Clergy 
 
 The Rev. Prebendary G. W. Pigott, M.A. ) of the Dl0CC£e - 
 
LIST OF MEMBERS 
 
 9 
 
 Lincoln.— 
 
 The Very Rev. J. W. Blakcsley, B.D., Dean. 
 
 The Vcn. W. F. J. Kayo, M.A., Archdeacon of Lincoln. 
 
 The Eight Rev. E. Tro'llope, D.D., Bishop- Suffragan of Nottingham, 
 
 Archdeacon of Stow. 
 The Ven. B rough Maltby, M.A., Archdeacon of Nottingham. 
 The Rev. Prebendary J. Clements, M.A., Proctor for the Chapter. 
 The Rev. Canon G. G. Perry, M. A., ) Proctors for the Clergy of 
 The Rev. Canon R. H. W. Miles, M.A.J the Diocese of Lincoln. 
 
 Llandaff— 
 
 The Very Rev. Charles John Vaughan, D.D., Dean. 
 
 The Ven. John Griffiths, D.D., Archdeacon of Llandaff. 
 
 The Ven. W. Crawley, M.A., Archdeacon of Monmouth. 
 
 The Rev. Canon Edward Hawkins, M.A., Proctor for the Chapter. 
 
 The Rev. C. R, Knight, M.A., ) Proctors for the Clergy of the 
 
 The Rev. W. Ecctham, M.A., ) Diocese. 
 
 Norwich — 
 
 The Very Rev. Edward Meyrick Goulburn, D.D., Dean. 
 
 The Ven. Thos. Thomason Perowne, B.D., Archdeacon of Norwich. 
 
 The Vcn. Henry Ralph Nevill, M.A., Archdeacon of Norfolk. 
 
 The Veu. R. H. Groome, M.A., Archdeacon of Suffolk. 
 
 The Rev. Canon C. K. Robinson, D.D., Proctor for the Chapter. 
 
 The Rev. Canon Hinds Howell, M.A., Proctor for the Clergy of 
 
 Norwich and Norfolk. 
 The Rev. Canon W. Potter, M.A., Proctor for the Clergy of 
 
 Suffolk. 
 
 Oxford—. 
 
 The Very Rev. H. G. Liddell, D.D., Dean. 
 The Vcn. Edwin Palmer, D.D., Archdeacon of Oxford. 
 The Vcn. J. Leslie Randall, M.A., Archdeacon of Buckingham. 
 The Vcn. A. Pott, B.D., Archdeacon of Berkshire. 
 The Rev. C. O. Goodford, D.D., Provost of Eton. 
 The Rev. Canon W. Bright, D.D., Proctor for the Chapter of 
 Christ Church. 
 
 The Rev. Canon C. Lloyd, B.A., ) Proctors for the Clergy of 
 The Rev. Canon W. J. Butler, M.A.J the Diocese of Oxford. 
 
 Peterborough — 
 
 The Very Rev. John James Stewart Perowne, D.D., Dean. 
 The Ven. Francis Henry Thicknesse, D.D., Archdeacon of North- 
 ampton. 
 
 The Ven. H. Fcaron, B.D., Archdeacon of Leicester. 
 
 The Ven. J. P. Lightfoot, D.D., Archdeacon of Oakham. 
 
 The Rev. Canon Marshall Argles, M.A., Proctor for the Chapter. 
 
 The Rev. Thomas Yard, M.A., \ Proctors for the Clergy of the 
 
 The Rev. Assheton Pownall, M.A., j Diocese. 
 
1(1 
 
 LIST OF MEMBERS. 
 
 Rochester — 
 
 The Very Rev. Robert Scott, D.D., Dean. 
 The Ven. Anthony Grant, D.C.L., Archdeacon of Rochester. 
 The Ven. Samuel Chcetham, M.A., Archdeacon of South wark. 
 The Ven. Charles Burney, M.A., Archdeacon of Kiugston-on- 
 Thames. 
 
 The Rev. Canon J. C. Miller, D.D., Proctor for the Chapter. 
 
 The Rev. Canon Pritchett, M.A., > Proctors for the Clergy of 
 
 The Rev. Canon Erskine Clarke, M.A.,) the Diocese. 
 
 Sullshmj— 
 
 The Very Rev. George David Boyle, D.D., Dean. 
 
 The Ven. Thomas Lear, M.A., Archdeacon of Sarum. 
 
 The Ven. Thomas Sanctuary, M.A., Archdeacon of Dorset. 
 
 The Ven. Thomas Boughton Buchanan, M.A., Archdeacon of Wilts. 
 
 The Rev. Prebendary Richard Payne, B.C.L., Proctor for the 
 
 Chapter. 
 The Rev. Prebendary Edwards 
 
 Arthur Dayman, B.D., / Proctors for the Clergy of the 
 
 The Rev. Prebendary Sir J. E. C Diocese. 
 
 Philipps, Bart., M.A., J 
 
 St. Asaph— 
 
 The Very Rev. R. M. Bonnor, M.A., Dean. 
 
 The Ven. Edward Smart, M.A., Archdeacon of St. Asaph. 
 
 The Ven. H. P. Efoulkes, M.A., Archdeacon of Montgomery. 
 
 The Rev. Canon Hugh Jones, M.A., Proctor for the Chapter. 
 
 The Rev. Canon David Williams, M.A., ) Proctors for the Clergy of 
 
 The Rev. William Richardson, M.A., j* the Diocese. 
 
 St. David's — 
 
 The Very Rev. James Allen, M.A., Deau. 
 
 The Ven. Richard Lewis, M.A., Archdeacon of St. David's. 
 
 Tho Ven. Wm. North, M.A., Archdeacon of Cardigan. 
 
 The Ven. William Evan James, M.A., Archdeacon of Carmarthen. 
 
 The Ven. Henry de Winton, M.A., Archdeacon of Brecon. 
 
 The Rev. Canon Edward Owen Phillips, M.A., Proctor for the 
 
 Chapter of St. David's. 
 The Rev. Prebendary William Latlmm } proctora for the Clergy of 
 
 TheRev. John Sinnett, M. A., ) the Diocese - 
 
 Worcester— 
 
 The Very Rev. Lord Alwyne Compton, D.D., Dean (Prolocutor). 
 The Ven. Richard Briudley Hone, M.A., Archdeacon of Worcester. 
 The Ven. C. W. Holbech, M.A., Archdeacon of Coventry. 
 The Rev. Canon J. R. Wood, M.A., Proctor for the Chapter. 
 
LIST OF MEMBERS. 
 
 11 
 
 Worcester — continued. 
 
 The Rev. Canon Wm. Willoughby | Pmctors for fche 01flrgy q£ the 
 
 Diocese. 
 
 Douglas, M.A 
 The Rev. William Bree, M.A.. 
 
 St. Allan's— 
 
 , Dean. 
 
 The Ven. Alfred Blomfield, M.A., Archdeacon of Essex. 
 The Ven. William Brice Ady, M.A., Archdeacon of Colchester. 
 The Hon. and Rev. Latimer Neville, M.A., ") Proctors for the Clergy 
 The Rev. Edward Thomas Vanghan, M. A., ) of the Diocese. 
 
 Trvro— 
 
 , Dean. 
 
 The Ven. William John Philpotts, M.A., Archdeacon of Cornwall. 
 The Ven. Reginald Hobhouse, M.A., Archdeacon of Bodmiu. 
 The Rev. Frederick Hockin, M.A.,")^ , r Al r ,, 
 
 The Rev. Arthur Christopher £ Pl '° ctors for tho Clcr ^ of the 
 Thynne,M.A., ) Dlocese " 
 
12 
 
 CHAPTER-HOUSE OF ST. PAUL'S, LONDON. 
 Session- I.— Friday, April 30, 1880. 
 
 Tiic Right Rev. the Bishops and Clergy of tbe Province wbo had 
 heen cited to attend this Convocation assembled at the Chapter- 
 house of the Cathedral Church of St. Paul's, London. His Grace 
 tbe Ai:ciiiiisnoi> of Canterbury, the President, arrived 'at about 
 eleven o'clock, attended by tbe Apparitor-General (Mr. Felix 
 Knyvott), his Grace's Chaplains (the Rev. T. Randall Davidson, 
 and the Rev. Canon Knolljs), the Vicar-General (Dr. J. Parker 
 Deane), and the Principal 'Registrar of the Province (Mr. John 
 Hassard), and was met at the west door by the Sacred Synod, and 
 conducted by the Dean and Capitular body to the central stall on 
 tbe south side of the choir, the Bishops who followed taking their 
 scats on either side in the stalls, and the Clergy those in front. Tbe 
 members of the Upper House wbo were present were the President, 
 the Bishops of London, Ely, Hereford, Oxford, St. Asaph, St. David's, 
 Rochester, and Lichfield; and of the Lower House, the Deans of 
 Llandaff and Worcester, Archdeacons Harrison, Hessey, Walker, 
 Malfcby, Crawley, Balston, Pott, Randall, Thicknesse, Barney, Lear, 
 Ady, Blomfiekl, and Holbech; Canons Rawlinson, Gregory, 
 Bernard, Swainson, Lowe, Harvey, Norris, Clements, Argles, Payne, 
 Jeffreys, Saptc, Salmon, Campion, Stephens, Hay ward, Barlow, 
 Knight, Hinds Howell, Lloyd, Pownall, Yard, Erskine Clarke, 
 Pritchett, Neville, Vaughan; Prebendary Gibbs, Sir J. E. Philipps, 
 Prebendary Dayman, Rev. C. R. Knight, Rev. W. Brce, &c. 
 
 The Bisnor of Lichfield, as junior prelate (the Bishop of 
 Salisbury, Precentor of the Province, being absent), then knelt at tbe 
 faldstool and monotoned the Litany in Latin ; after which the hymn, 
 
 Yeni, Sanctc SpirifcuF, 
 Kt emittc coclitus 
 Lucis tusc radium ; — 
 
 was sung by the choir as an anthem; and the following Latin 
 Sermon was preached by the Ven. Edwakd Balstox, D.D., Arch- 
 deacon of Derby : — 
 
 "Ul)i sunt duo vcl trcs congicjati iu uom'me Mco, ibi sum iu medio eorum."— S Mall 
 xviii. 20. 
 
 Quum visum est tibi, Pater in Christo admodum Jicvcrcndc, me ad hec 
 opus hodie tractnndnm vocarc, id tantum mourn est, ut laborem quantuscunquc 
 sit pro virili parte quamvis indignns suscipiam— ncque tamcn non confiteor mc 
 coram vobis loqui, Patres in Deo Reverendi, Fratres dilectissimi, id difficillimnm 
 esse, id non mediocri me afficcrc solicitudine. Attamcn quod mini agendum 
 proponitur, id agendum est. Gratias tibi primum, Dcus Pater optime maxime, 
 pratias tibi, Jcsu Christo, laudem ot rrratias tibi, Spiritns Sanctc, apamus, quod 
 in hac (F.dc sumus congregati, Ecclesise Anglicanas Synodus — " DW sunt duo 
 vol tres congrogati in nomine Mco, ibi sum in medio eorum." Tu enim dixisti ; 
 
13 
 
 Te jabente, Patres nostri in h&c terra, uums abhino plus quam mille, solenni 
 consuetudlno congregati fuerunt, ut quicquid Tu juberea perficerent; quicquid 
 Tu olini Ecclesiuo Tux- servandnm mandavisti, diligenter tucrentur ac 
 enstodirent. Id ipaum qos facere studemns ; eodem nmnere aos fungi volamus. 
 Quum cnini Christus, in coeloa ascendens, id cgit ut Ecclesia; Sua) in oinno 
 tempos consuleret, Apostolis suis prsecepit mm solum ut in omnes terras 
 profioiscentea Vcrbum prasdicarent, Evangelii lucem omni poptdo tencbris 
 obfuso porrigerent, verum etiam regnum coelorum facerent ut solido Ipsius 
 firmamento stabiliretur ac constaret. Id veronon per unum, ut nonnnlli volunt, 
 Christi Vicarium, scd per compluros viros in unum congregates fieri, liquido 
 patet ex Sacrosanctis Scriptis — conveniebant Apostoli, ut sup])licatione habita 
 eligerent qui in locum Jud;e Iscariotae reeiperctur. Item "Convocabant duodecim 
 multitudinem discipulorum," ut diaconornm ordo institucrctur. Item quum 
 dispntaretur de circumcisione secundum morcm Moysi omnibus impcranda, 
 " convenerunt Apostoli et seniorcs," hoc est, prcsbytcri, " vidcrc de vcrbo hoc." 
 Constat etiam ex historia, non solum in Coneiliis (Kcumenicis, quorum decreta 
 apud univcrsam ecclosiam obtinuerunt, sed etiam in Synodia vel Diocesanis vol 
 I'rovincialibus id moris fuisse a Christo Hege derivati, ut quod ab illis sancirctur, 
 id apud fidcles suos non evancsccret. Ergo id nobis recordandum est, quomodo 
 rem fieri volucrit Christus. Ipse dixit; Ipse id quod dixit scriptum nobis 
 tradidit Ipse rem Ecclesia; sua; provisam habet, si modo uos liomunculi ; fidem 
 Ejus teucntes lwereauius in vestigiis Ejus, Ducem Eum attente et fideliter 
 scquamur. 
 
 Quid vero, cum nostra hac uctato pererebresoit opinio, quod, Dei 
 Revclationc occlusa, et aacro Ejus libro jamdiu finito, non ulla opus est 
 auctoritate, quae dirigat, moucat, castiget Chriatianoa — unumquemque enim, 
 Spiritu Dei adjuvante, examinarc verum, judicarc, amplecti posse ; Deumquod 
 desit fidci, id daturum, quod deficiat complcturum ; quorsum Spirit us 
 Sancti munus, nisi ut, intus in prsecordiis servatus, doccat unumquemque et 
 fidem stabiliat. Quod si ita foret, quo tandem fides nostra? Quo Christi 
 auctoritas in Ecclesia? Quo prascepta Ejus Apostolis commissa? Num 
 antiqna ilia obsolcverunt dicta? Num qua? in Actis Apostolorum legimus, ca 
 nobis pro nihilo habenda sunt? 
 
 Considerate, quouso, mecum qua- apud 8. Matthautm inveniuntur — quo in 
 loco occurrit notissimum illud ac gravissimum Christi Ipsius promissum — 
 ■ Ubi sunt duo vel trcs congregati in nomine Meo, ibi sum in medio eorum." 
 Non me fallit hooc verba a plerisquo ita intelligi ut ad publicas nostrorum 
 preccs refcrantur, quum, in icdem Dei congregati, supplicationcs, laudem, 
 grates uno ore Patri nostra eliundimus ; neque infitias eo, versum huic 
 pra?cedentem co spec-tare, " Si duo ex vobis oonsenserint super terram do omni 
 re quamcunque peticrint, fiet illis a l'atrc Meo, qui in coelis est." Quod si 
 totam banc narrationem quid sibi velit perpendanms, difficile erit, ut opinor 
 non coufiteri, quod ad preccs solum exercendas primo visu spectare videatnr, 
 id Synodos quoque Ecclesia', quid ab illis fieri debeat ut res prospero cveniat 
 succcssu, apte si rationabili modo comprehenderc ac complecti. 
 
 Primum enim scrmo oritur de parvulis illis Christi discipulis quibus no 
 injuria fiat, qui no ofiendantur ant scandalizentur, cavendum est. " Qui 
 scandalizavcritunum de pusillis istis qui in Mccrcdunt, cxpedit ei ut suspendatur 
 mola asinaria in collo ejus, et domergatur in profundum maris." I'arvuli ill i 
 qui sint cogitanti videntur intelligi non ii solum, qui tenera atate 
 adolescunt, scd qui fidem Christi nnper agnovemnt, nuper tantnm gustnvcrunt 
 qnam dulcis sit Dominus — quos sanctus illc Pctrus appellat " modo genitos 
 infantes." Iidcm, infirmi jam et imboeillitatc affecti, magno sunt in periculo, 
 si quis fidem Christianam containinaverit, si quis, admissA in so turpitudine, Dei 
 legem contcmnere et repudiarc volucrit. Quod quum vitium et libido tantopere 
 in terris abundent, quum in medio pravorum et inhoncstorum ambnlandum 
 sit, " necesse est ut veniant soandala " " voo mundo a scandalis." Turn vcro 
 Christus ea pcrstringit scelera, qua? aut mauus perficit, aut pes eundo nostra} 
 
14 
 
 objicit cupiditati, aut oculus infeliciter injectus pravae libidinis scintillam 
 accendit, excitat, crescentem fomite adauget flammam. Mulctam lus membris, 
 quae sit irroganda, idem ille Christus expedit nobis. Quo dicto, iterum ad pusillos 
 istosredit. "Videtenecontemnatis." Angeli in ccelo eos respiciunt. Christus 
 quos diligit, ut perountcs conservet, exquirit. Instar boni pastoris, qui si unam 
 cx centum ovibus amiscrit, nonaginta novem in montibus relinquit ; vadit 
 quaerere crrantcm. Sic qui offensus a Cliristo aberraverit, oportet cum nos 
 quaercrc, redigere in grcgem. Id Deus vult ; id angeli conspicantes gaudent. 
 Rem igitur considerate. Ecquis id facere debet? Nonne quos Pastor ille 
 maximus ad id ipsum mumis delegit, misit, missis auxiliatur, tuetur, roliorat? 
 Quos nisi vos, Patres in Cliristo Reverendi? Quos nisi vos, Fratres, Spiritus 
 Sancti afflatn instituti et instincti? 
 
 Porro attentius rem explicat. Si quis ex pusillis istis peccatum admiserit, si 
 fidem Christi negaverit, si turpitudinem aliquam aut inhonestum conceperit 
 fiagitium, quomodo tractandus sit, docet. Erranti quoad poteris, dicere videtur, 
 fratri consule. Fiagitium ejus noli in vulgus proferre, donee eum privatim 
 voce leni correptum monueris, culpam ostenderis, pocnitentiam suaseris. "Si 
 te audierit, lucratus eris fratrem tuum. Si non audierit, adhibe tecum rnium 
 vel duos, ut in ore duorum vel trium testium stet omne verbum." Delictum 
 de quo agitur nonne ad fidem Cbristianam vel abnegandam vel rejiciendam 
 spectat? Cur enim testes adliibendi sunt, nisi ut, re audita, fidem Catholicam 
 aut sanctae Ecclesiae leges, aut de quibus rebus fieri potest ut dubitetur, 
 exponant diligenter ac confirment. " Qu&d si non audierit eos, die Ecclesiae." 
 Rem in Curiam defer — coram Ecclesia, ceu coram judice, stet causa. " Si 
 ecclesiam non audierit, sit tibi sicut ethnicus et publicanus." Sententiam 
 ecclesiae prorsus latam Christus Ipse pollicetur se aftirmaturum — quod ilia 
 judicaverit, id ratum fore. " Si duo ex vobis consenserint super terram de 
 omni re quameunque pctierint, fict illis a Patre Meo, qui in coelis est. Ubi 
 sunt duo vel tres congregati in nomine Meo, ibi sum in medio eorum." 
 
 En, hoc loco nobis a Christo dcclarata disciplinae ratio, quam Ipse vult 
 cxerceri in Ecclesia ! Si quis peccaverit in te, ne acerbus sis, ne nimium festines 
 poenam irrogare — utere consilio leni, benigno — ut vincas eum erroris convince — 
 fratri fratrem te praesta. Quod si humanitatem tuam et benevolentiam 
 obstinate aspemctnr, ne longius procedat scandalum, defer in Curiam — rem 
 publice decernendam cura. 
 
 Meminerint vero jndices apud quos causa agatnr, cujns vice fungantnr. 
 Christus Ipse Rex, qui invisus Ecclesia? prsesidet Sua^, Christus Ipse assidens 
 ministris ntitnr suis, per quos Ipse rem audit, legem exponit, poenam irrogat. 
 Quod si Ille jus dicit, quomodo audient Eum ministri Ejus, nisi supplicatione 
 habita, Spiritus Sancti afflatu genibus flexis petito, patienter ac fideliter voeem 
 ejus opperti fuerint? Turn Vox Ecclesiae Vox Christi est. Christus Ipse 
 promisit se praesentem in Ecclesiae fore omnibus diebus — Christus Ipse in coelos 
 ascendens Spiritum Sanctum in terras demisit, qui semper praesens doceat, 
 dirigat nos in omnem vcritatem. 
 
 Quod si res ita se habct, si Christus Ipse banc disciplinae rationem Ecclesiae 
 Suae delegavit, quid tandem de nobis factum est? Kum Ecclesiae huic 
 Anglicanae Synodus est, quae causas audit spirituales, lites divimit, jus 
 dicit? quae si quis fidem Cbristianam abnegaverit, doctrinam Ejus repu- 
 diaverit, Ecclesiae leges contempserit, continuo re examinata quod verum 
 est declaravit, quod falsum damnavit? Atqui banc ipsam ob rem hue 
 hodie convenimus — convocamur, congregati sumus, Ecclesiae Anglicanx 
 Synodus. Nobis datur opportunitas loquendi, disserendi, in suffragium eundi. 
 Sed quorsum haec? Cum nuperrime scandala venerunt, ut veniant necesse 
 est, quaenam huic Convocationi apparuit potestas vel audiendi vel eorrigendi, 
 scandalizantem fraenandi, errantem lucrandi fratrem? Immo in iis rebus, 
 quas considerandas nobis mandavit Regina, nonne metus incidit, ne, si per- 
 fectum opus Parliamento proponeretur consulenti, proceres isti rem jubere 
 nollent — perderetur noster labor. Attamen Christi Ecclesiae non est magnia 
 
15 
 
 EeipubliceB interesee conciliis — non civium jure logos ferendaa curare — non 
 tsrrenam affectare potestatem. .Sod qure Christus suis mandavit ea servare, 
 fidei Christiana; quaa vol noccant vol impediant amovorc — veram Dei lampada 
 gentilms ostontare — regnura coelorum in fcerris, Christo dace ct auspice, 
 propagare ac lirmare. Quid ergo? Nostra; huic Convocation! haac conecssa 
 eat po testae? At Christi Ecclesia; tradita est. Nos a Christo stare prolitemur. 
 Nobis datur convenirc, disputare, in suffragium ire. Cur non scandala audiro 
 ao coercero? Cur his diebus in civiles itur curias, ut lites dirimantur 
 ecclesiastical? An qua; Christi datur ecclesia?, nobis amissa est potestas? 
 Supcrest nomen Convocationis, deperiit vis? imago tantum corporis non 
 spiritus incst? Immo vero, si res ita so habet, quid nos facere oportet? 
 " Corpus enim sine spiritu mortuum est." Si ecclesia vivit Anglicana, vivit 
 profocto, quia Sanctus Dei Spiritus inost — vivit, quia Christns Ipse nobiscum 
 habitat. " Ubi Spiritus Domini, ibi libcrtas." Qualis, inquam, nostra 
 ha.'C libcrtas, si convenire ao colloqui tantum, nihil amplius datur ! 
 
 Profuerit fortasso considerare, quomodo olim amissa fuorit, qua ratione 
 pnssit reouperari libertas. Mnltis abhinc annis moris fuit cum apud Bi-itonas 
 antiqnos, turn Saxonas ctiam ct Anglo-Xorinannos legitimam liabcre in Ecclesia 
 Synodum, cui cura: fuit Christi grogem in his tcrris curare, saluti ovium 
 consulere, agnos tencra foverc solicitudinc. Quum vero Clericis increvcrunt 
 opos, Rex nummorum indigene vol ad belhun vol ad sumptus suos impoudendos, 
 vectigalia eis imposuit solvenda ; ipsis vero, in Synodum convocatis, id rogaro 
 ac jubere dedit. Inveteravit paulatim consuctudo, clero jugum frustra 
 dotrectante — donee in Parliamcntum non in Synodum Convocati, idquc a Rege 
 Edvardo Primo non ab Archicpiscopo, strenue ac fortiter recusavcrunt. Quum 
 vero postca Henrico Rogi Octavo sc subjecisscnt, quum pollicerentur so 
 nullam nisi quam Rex vohicrit rem disceptaturos, logos nullas laturos, nulla 
 inituros consilia, an nine mali fons? Quid? oblitine sunt patrcs nostri quid 
 Christo debeatur, quid Bpiritui Sancto Ecclesiam intus dirigenti, custodionti, 
 hrmanti? Oblitine sunt quo munere Christus suos fungi volucrit, id exer- 
 condum, id enrandum esse? Non ecclesia; datum est tcrrenos sibi appctcro 
 vel honores, vel divitias, vel impcrium. Christus jussit suos esse ad instar civitatis 
 supra montem posit;o — aut luccnuo, qua; accensa ponitur " super candclabro, ut 
 luooat omnibus qui in domo sunt." " Vos cstis lux mundi," ait — " Vos estis sal 
 terra?. Quod si sal evanuerit, in quo salietur? Ad nihilum valet ultra, nisi ut 
 mittatnr foras, et conculcetnr, ab hominibus." Quod si, ut vidctur, Rogi terreno 
 nos morem gercntes Christum obliti snmus, Christi vim ac robur deposuimus, 
 Christi spiritum e coclo missum ad banc rem orareet colere omisimus, potestne 
 fieri ut hinc orta sit quas nos hodie cepit oorumna — hinc vcri qualiscunque sit 
 obumbratio — hinc infirmitas nostra et Ecclesia; Anglicana; imbecillitas? Cir- 
 cumspicito Britanniam domi — foris colonias — quibus in tcrris Ecclesia 
 Anglicana vexillum Christi posuit, en, lites, jnrgia, dissonsioncs, dissidia. 
 Quousque tandem abutemur patientia, Dei ! Quous(pie tandem in nostra hac 
 Ecclesia Synodo dcerit libcrtas, vita, in rebus spiritualibus auctoritas? Quonam 
 modo fieri potest, ut qua; amisimus, recuperentur pra;sidia? Non terrona 
 petimus. Non qua; mundns aut dare aut adimere potest. Petimus tantum, ut 
 Spiritus Sancti atbatu roborati, officio nostro ct muncri non desimus. Tempus 
 scilicet breve datur ; plurimum jam ingravescit opus. Lux Evangclii per 
 totum fere orbem terrarum Ecclesia; Anglicana; vi ac roborc diffundenda est et 
 illustranda. Exsurge, Dens, adjuva nos. Anglicana exsurgat Ecclesia. 
 Christi lampada pra; so ferens lucom apud gentes cxteras apud insulas din 
 expectatam in tenebris accondat. Immo vero in bollum proliciscamur militcs — 
 armatura, Dei sumpta, vcritatcm justitiam induti, pugncmus, deccrtemus, 
 hostes undique concurrentes dissipemus — nusquam mora sit, nusquam otium, 
 donee victores summa rcrum potiti Clu-isti et Ecclesia; vexillum in alto monte 
 fixum et stabilitum posnerimus. 
 
 Dixi. Deo laus et gloria in rcternum. Amen. 
 
 At the close of the Sermon the Gloria in Excelsls, from a Mass of 
 
1(3 LOWER HOUSE — Al'RIL 30. < Election of 
 
 \ Prolocutor. 
 
 Weber's, was sung by tlic choir; after which his Grace the 
 President pronounced the Benediction in Latin. 
 
 Divine Service being ended, his Grace the President, attended by 
 the Bishops and other members of the Convocation, proceeded to 
 the Chapter-house, where the Vicar- General presented to the 
 Archbishop the Queen's Writ for summoning the Convocation; 
 which having been read, the Bishop of London, as Dean of the 
 Province of Canterbury, returned the mandate, with his certificate 
 that it had been duly executed. The certificate having been read 
 aloud by the Archbishop's order, the Registrar praiconized the 
 Bishops mentioned in the return from the Dean of the Province, 
 and the Archbishop referred the certificates transmitted by them, 
 and the letters of proxy, to the Vicar-General. The Registrar then 
 read, by the President's order, the Schedule of Contumacy, by which 
 all parties cited and not appearing were pronounced contumacious, 
 with a reservation of the penalties until a further day, whicli 
 Schedule the President signed. 
 
 The President then admonished, in a Latin form, the Clergy of 
 the Province to withdraw, under the directiou of the Dean of St. 
 Paul's, to the Chapel at the north-west end of the Cathedral Church 
 of St. Paul, there to form themselves into a Lower House, and to 
 choose a Prolocutor, and to present him for approval and confirma- 
 tion to his Grace at the Jerusalem Chamber at Westminster, between 
 the hours of nine and eleven in the forenoon, on the day to which 
 the Convocation will stand prorogued. 
 
 The Clergy of the Province withdrew accordingly, and the 
 President substituted in his place the Vicar- General, Dr. James 
 Parker Deane, to receive from the Dean of St. Paul's the report of 
 the choice of a Prolocutor. 
 
 The Registrar then, by order of the President, read the Schedule 
 of Prorogation, whereby the Convocation stood prorogued to 
 Tuesday, the 1st day of June next ensuing, at the Jerusalem 
 Chamber at Westminster, which Schedule the Archbishop signed. 
 
 The President and Bishops then departed, leaving the Vicar- 
 General at the Chapter-house to receive the report of the choice of 
 a Prolocutor by the Clergy in the Lower House. 
 
 LOWER HOUSE, 
 ELECTION of prolocutor. 
 The Clergy of the Province being assembled in the Chapel at the 
 north-west end of the Cathedral, as directed by his Grace the 
 President, the Dean of St. Paul's took the chair, and the Praooni. 
 zation of the members was made by the Actuary, Mr. F. Cobb. 
 
median of i LOWER HOUSE — April 30. 17 
 
 1'rolocutor. ) 
 
 The Dean of St. Paui/s — The House will now proceed to the 
 election of a Prolocutor. 
 
 Archdeacon HARRISON — I believe it has been usual that someone 
 belonging to the official portion of the House should propose a 
 candidate for the office of Prolocutor, aud that he should bo seconded 
 by an elected member. In the absence of the Dean and Archdeacon 
 of Canterbury I may claim to represent the official members of the 
 metropolitical Church. Our lato Prolocutor (the Dean of Lichfield) 
 used sometimes to say I was the father of the House. That was 
 not then exactly true, for the Archdeacon of Cardigan was my 
 senior by a year; but from his ago and infirmity, as wo all know, 
 lie was unable to take any part in our deliberations. I may add 
 that from the first revival of Convocation I have taken a deep 
 interest in its proceedings. When it appeared from the letter 
 which the late Prolocutor (Dr. Bickersteth) addressed to you, Mr. 
 Dean, that we were about to lose his services, the eyes of all of us 
 were very much directed to one person; but I cannot mention the 
 late Prolocutor, even incidentally, without expressing, so far as it is 
 proper for me to do so, tho regard and affection which wo entertain 
 for him, and our sense of the admirable way in which he fulfilled 
 his duties. Many of those duties were of a character that did not 
 appear before the public. They included the careful selection of Com- 
 mittees, and the arrangement of the important matters to be submitted 
 to the House; in which ho always showed the most scrupulous and 
 impartial care that every member should have a fair opportunity of 
 putting his proposition in the most favourable form, and in tho 
 way best calculated to commend itself to the acceptance of the 
 House. The office of Prolocutor is undoubtedly one of dignity 
 and honour — of honour, especially, because it expresses tho con- 
 fidence of the great body of the Convocation of Canterbury in the 
 person selected to fill it — but at the same time it is a laborious 
 office. It is not generally known how great the labour is which 
 is involved in its duties. Our lato Prolocutor has referred to the 
 unprecedented fact that he has been elected four times; and you will 
 feel that it would be hardly right to throw upon him any longer tho 
 labours of the office after he had expressed a wish to retire from 
 them. No doubt an opportunity will offer itself for expressing our 
 senso of his services; [but, at present, it will doubtless be the 
 disposition of tho House to release him, as he desires, from the 
 burden. I trust, and, indeed, I am sure, that nothing will take 
 away from him his interest in Convocation ; and I hope that he 
 will fulfil the Archbishop's desire, who wishes to see the Deans 
 more constant in their attendance, and that, whether he will come 
 amongst us, or else be absent, he will hear of our affairs that wo 
 stand fast with one spirit, with one mind, striving together, with 
 brotherly affection, and with undiminished anxiety, for the main- 
 tenance of the faith, the welfare of the Church, and the benefit 
 of our population both at home and in our vast Colonial Empire, 
 upon which, as has been so often said, the sun never sets. I have 
 
 c 
 
18 LOWER HOUSE — Apbil 30. < Election of 
 
 (_ Prolocutor. 
 
 said there is one to whom our thoughts Lave been much directed, 
 and that is Lord Alwyne Compton. (" Hear, hear.") The name 
 of Lord Alwyne lias been very long before Convocation. First, 
 he was an elected representative of the Clergy of Peterborough; 
 then, by the goodwill of his Bishop, he came to us as one of the 
 Archdeacons of the diocese; and now, by the favour of the Crown, 
 he appears amongst us in a new garb and with a new dignity, 
 but I feel sure with no less zeal for the welfare of Convocation 
 and of the Church than he exhibited as an elected Proctor and 
 as an Archdeacon. I may say it has so happened that for some 
 years I have had my scat in the House beside him, and hence, 
 perhaps, my deep sense of the great knowledge which he brings to 
 bear upon the concerns of Convocation. This has been especially 
 the ease in Committees; and when I mention those on the Rubrics, 
 upon Additional Services, and upon the Tables of Lessons, you will 
 understand how great have been his labours which have never come 
 before the public. Lord Alwyne has also been a member of Joint 
 Committees of both Convocations; and here I may express my 
 earnest desire that we may always see the Synods of the two Pro- 
 vinces standing side by side, and that the most cordial relations may 
 long continue between them. (" Hear, hear.") I need not enlarge 
 upon Lord Alwyne's acquaintance with Convocation, with its 
 history, its constitution, its precedents, and the business which it 
 has transacted of late years; but when to all this is added the kind- 
 ness and brotherly regard which he shows to every member of the 
 House, it will be allowed that the mantle of the late Prolocutor will, 
 so to speak, descend upon him. (" Hear, hear.") The office is not 
 only a laborious, but it is a delicate one. The Prolocutor is the 
 Peferendarius of the House, elected by its members, but receiving 
 also the approbation of the Archbishop; and if we lose in him as our 
 Prolocutor the large share which he has hitherto taken in our 
 debates — if he shall speak to us no more with the kuowledge and 
 skill in debate with which we are so familiar, he will speak for us. 
 He will be the Speaker — in Parliamentary phrase — and the Prolo- 
 cutor and Referendary, in Convocational language. He will be the 
 organ of communication between the two Houses; and his high- 
 born courtesy makes us quite sure he will receive and communicate 
 to us, in the most dutiful and respectful manner, the messages 
 which may come to us from the Upper House, and the business 
 which the Archbishop may commit to us; while at the same time 
 he will be the firm maintainer of the privileges of the Lower 
 House- — privileges which are the more important because amongst 
 all the Churches of Christendom it is in the Church of England the 
 distinctive right of the presbytery to concur in the action of theEpisco- 
 pate; so that its assent is necessary to the final decision upon every 
 question. I have said far less than I might have done in commen- 
 dation of the Dean of Worcester because I am speaking in his 
 presence; and I will only add that in proposing him for your 
 acceptance as Prolocutor I am expressing, so far as I can see, the 
 general feeling of the House. (" Hear, hear.") 
 
Election of -i LOWER HOUSE — April 30. 19 
 
 Frolocutor. j 
 
 Canon Gregory — I beg, as an elected member — as the represen- 
 tative of the Chapter of St. Paul's — to second the nomination. 
 After the able and exhaustive speech in which my excellent and 
 venerable friend has proposed Lord Alwyne, it is unnecessary forme 
 to say more; but there is one point on which I should like to add a 
 word. It has been suggested to me that we should press our old 
 Prolocutor to resume office once more. To me, however, it seems 
 that, after the decided manner in which our very rev. friend, 
 the late Prolocutor, has conveyed to us his wish to retire after a 
 service of sixteen years, such a course would be a highly 
 unflattering one. It would be like saying, on the one hand, that 
 Dean Bickersteth was insincere in the desire he has expressed to 
 resign his office, and that the announcement of such a wish was 
 designed to elicit stronger expressions of affection and deference from 
 Convocation; or, on theother hand, that the House wasinsincere in the 
 respect it professed for him. It must be well known to every member 
 of the Lower House that, if the late Prolocutor had not signified his 
 wish to retire, he would have been re-elected without opposition. 
 Feeling, then, that both he and we are sincere in our relations towards 
 each other, I feel that we are bound to accept his own words as a 
 true indication of his real wishes, and not to attempt to force on him 
 a longer continuance of his labours. It seems, therefore, to be the 
 wisest and most courteous thing to accept the Dean of Lichfield's 
 request in the spirit in which it was made. That being so, the 
 present business of the House is to elect the most efficient substitute 
 that we can find ; and I am satisfied that all will concur in the 
 opinion that Lord Alwyne Compton is peculiarly fitted for the office. 
 He has acted on several occasions as pro-Prolocutor, and experience 
 has shown that he possesses a most admirable temper. His uniform 
 kindness and courtesy must have commended him to all the 
 members. It is essential that the Prolocutor should have been 
 for a long time a member of the House, for he must be well 
 acquainted with the precedents and practice of its proceedings. 
 Lord Alwyne Compton has been in the Lower House for many 
 years; he is eminent as a debater; and he is remarkable for his 
 skill in explaining difficult questions clearly and fairly. In a word, 
 if we elect Lord Alwyne Compton, I feel sure that we shall secure 
 a most able Prolocutor. 
 
 The motion was unanimously agreed to. 
 
 The Dean of St. Paul's — It is usual to name two members of 
 Convocation to present the newly elected Prolocutor to his Grace 
 the Archbishop, and, generally speaking, those two members are 
 the mover and seconder. 
 
 Archdeacon Harrison— Will you allow me to say that that 
 course is not invariably taken ; and that it would be desirable to 
 appoint some junior member of the House whose Latinity is more 
 fresh than mine? The House will remember that Canon Selwyn 
 
 c2 
 
20 LOWER HOUSE— April 30. < Election of 
 
 ( rrohtutor. 
 
 was appointed to present the lute Prolocutor, though he was neither 
 the mover nor seconder. 
 
 The Dean ok St. Paul's — In that case there were special reasons 
 for the appointment of Canon Selwyn, and I trust that the Arch- 
 deacon will not decline the office. I think it most desirable that so 
 important a member of this House should not shrink from the task, 
 and I am quite sure we may feel perfectly easy on the subject of 
 his Latin. 
 
 Archdeacon Harrison— I submit myself as a dutiful member of 
 the House to the wish of the Dean of St. Paul's. 
 
 The motion was agreed to; and the Dean of St. Paul's then 
 declared the House prorogued until Tuesday, the 1st day of June 
 next ensuing; and the report of the choice of the Clergy of the 
 Lower House was made to tho Vicar-General, as directed by his 
 Grace the President. 
 
PRESENTATION OF PEOLOCOTOE. 
 
 21 
 
 COLLEGE LI ALL, WESTMINSTER. 
 
 Session Tuesday, June 1, 1880. 
 
 The Holy Communion was celebrated in the Chapel of King 
 Henry VII., in Westminster Abbey; after which both Houses 
 assembled in the College Hall. 
 
 The Dean of Westminster read a formal protest setting forth 
 that his Church was immediately subject to the Queeu's Majesty 
 and to none other, and that though it had pleased the Archbishop 
 from motives of convenience to hold his sacred Provincial Synod 
 within the precincts of the Abbey, the Dean and Chapter did 
 not on that account admit that his Grace had acquired any jurisdic- 
 tion over it. 
 
 To this protest a reply of his Grace the President, disclaiming all 
 intention of invading the rights, privileges, and immunities of the 
 Dean and Chapter, was read by the Registrar. 
 
 The protest and reply were duly signed and attested. 
 
 The Archdeacon of Maidstone and Canon Gregory (who had been 
 appointed to that office at the meeting at St. Paul's) then presented 
 the new Prolocutor, the Very Rev. Lord Alvvyne Compton, Dean of 
 Worcester, 
 
 Archdeacon Harrison saying — Revcrendissimc in Christo Pater, 
 Convocations hujuscc Prajscs dignissimo — Praescnto tibi hunc 
 Viruni Admodum Revercndum, cundem ct Hcmoratissimum, 
 Dominum Alvinum Compton, Sacra) Thcologiaj Professorem, 
 Dceanum Vigornienscm ; nt, to faveute, auctoritato tua in locum 
 et officium Prolocutoris, scu Referendarii, Domus nostras In- 
 ferioris Cleri Provincial Cantuariensis, confirmatns admittatur. 
 Jussu tuo, Pater Roverendissime, in locum consuctum, duco ct 
 press ide Decano yEdis Divi Pauli nosmet conferentcs, ibidem 
 congregati, nulla mora adhibila, nemine disscntientc, hunc Virum, 
 ut quern prse castcris huic muneri idoncum judicavimus, consensu 
 unanimi elegimus. Quando enim certiores facti sumus Virum 
 Admodum Reverendum, nobis omnibus dilectum, quern tcrque 
 quaterquo in hoc officium jamdudum elcgeramus, Decanum Lich- 
 fieldensem, nolle itcrnm munus in so suscipere quod, ipsi volenti, 
 volens Domus nostra ccrte uno animo detulisset, in hunc prsecipue 
 converti videbantur omnium oculi, sperantium scilicet fore ut in hoc 
 ficret quod poeta dc ramo illo arboris mirifica) finxit— 
 Prime, avulso non deficit alter 
 Aurena, et simili frondescit virga metallo. 
 
22 
 
 PRESENTATION OF PROLOCUTOR. 
 
 Quem enim suffrages nostris indubitanter comprobavimus, nove- 
 ramus per annos plus quam viginta iu rebus Convocationis nostrae 
 diligenter admodum et accurate esse versaturn. Stirpe nobili ortus, 
 fama paterna et prnavis clarissimis hand indignus, in Academia sua 
 Cantabrigieusi, studio scientiarum quibus Alma Mater Cantabrigia 
 summopere gaudet, honores sibi vindicavit. Deinde Sacris 
 Ordinibus initiatus, et cura pastorali suscepta, ita se commendavit, 
 ipse adbuc junior, fratrum suorum clericorum favori, ut pro Clero 
 Dioceseos Petriburgensis procurator eligeretur. Post iuultos annos 
 bis studiis et operibus occupatus, Episcopo suo dignus videbatur, 
 qui, quum novus constituendus esset in Diocesi ista Archidiaconatus, 
 officio Arcbidiaconi ipse praaficeretur. Nuperantem Regina? nostra? 
 Augnstissimaj favorc, in Decanatum Ecclesins Vigorniensis, appro- 
 bantibus bonis omnibus, elevatus est. Quodautem ad res Synodales 
 attinet, nemo est, e cousessu Domus nostra?, qui impensius operara 
 dedcrit, non tantum negotiis peragendis qua? totius Domus irapen- 
 dendam curara efflagitaut, verum etiam in ccetibus istis minoribus, 
 in quibus, jussu aut permissu tuo, Praises Reverendissime, viria 
 sclcctis committitur munus res graviores et difficiles penitus investi- 
 gandi ct plenius expoueudi; quo maturius et melius Convocatio ipsa 
 Integra dc iis consilium capiat, et capto, rem suffrages universorum 
 committat Quinimo, cum nuper expedire visum sit providerc, no 
 tardarcntur. Domus nostras deliberations, mora interposita, dutn 
 Prolocutor noster coram pra?sentia Clementia? tua? se prestabat, 
 aut a te arcessitus aut res reportaus qua? in Domo Inferiori 
 transacts fuerant, bic est cui Prolocutor noster, pro prudentia 
 sua, officium mandavit in sedc sua vicem ipsius gereudi, et, 
 tanquam Pro-prolocutor in tempus, consiliis Domus pra?sidendi. 
 Talis enim est, ne merita ejus indigne sileam, humanitate 
 animi, suavitate morum, justi et o?qui studio, fraterna in omnes 
 benevolentia, ut certo sciamus fore ut mentes fratrum 
 diversas, et opiniones a se invicem differentes, feliciter concilians 
 etin unum redigens, deliberationis cureum legitima? et bene rnorata? 
 in exitum secundum perducat. Persuasum babemus, inprimis, de 
 eo quod, in officio Interpretis et Intcrnuncii inter Domum vestram 
 Superiorem et nostram Inferiorem pcrageudo, partes sibi commissas 
 fidcliter ct feliciter exsequetur; voluntatem et man data tna. Pra?sul 
 Reverendissime, et Fratrum tuorum, Patrnm nostroruni in Clu isto, 
 observantia et reverentia debita recepturus, et nobis relaturus; sal vis 
 interea studio vigilanti et religioso custoditis privilegiis istis Domus 
 nostra", qua? non minus interest sacrorum Episcopates jurium quam 
 libertatum antiquarum Presbyterorum in Synodo hac insigni 
 ProvinciiB Cantuariensis priscum et primitivum usum referente, 
 sancta et inviolata servari. Convocationis autem hujusce constitu- 
 tionem respicienti, liceat mibi, Pater Reverendissime, priusquam 
 orationi mea? finem imponam, gratulari tibi et Fratribus tuis, 
 Episcopis, nec vobis solum gratulari, sed effari simul quo nos 
 afficiamur gaudio, quod duas sedes bodie aspicimus ccetui vestro 
 venerabili additas — tertia procul dubio, mox adjicienda, necnon et 
 
PRESENTATION OF PROLOCUTOR. 
 
 23 
 
 tribus simili modo Provincial Eboraceusi — unara, in hac Provincia 
 EcclesisB, illius Abbatise celeberrimse, sancti Albani, Protomartyris 
 Anglia;, titulo dedicates; alteram Cornubias, sedemEpiscopi autiquam 
 in memoriam rovocantem, imo- potius in vitam novam resurgentern; 
 Ecclesia; vere Cathedralis formam et spcciem pra; se ferentem, cum 
 canonico presby terorum collegio, tempore debito instituondo, 
 cajterisque choro sacro inservientibns ministris. De Ecclesia autem 
 Traronensi praacipue in animo dicere est, quia intra paucos dies 
 preeteritos, lapidem ejus angularcm rite et soloimiter posuit Princepa 
 Ulustrissimus, quem Cornubia Ducemsuum natum agnoscit, et quern 
 nunc summa laatitia prassentem sibi vidit, adstante Principissa 
 gratiosissima; donis anri argentique large effusis, in bonorem Dei 
 cujus est argentum et aurum, et Filii Ejus Unici, qui Ipse est 
 " Princeps regum terra;;" de quo scriptum est in vcrbo propbetia;, 
 " Rcges Tharsis et insula; munera offerent; reges Avabum ct Saba 
 dona adducent." Oremus autem suppliccs Deum Omnipoteutem, 
 ut nunquam eveniat, apud nos saltern, in hoc regno adbuc Dei 
 gratia Christiano, homines impie Regalia Christi abnucre, et 
 Eeclcsiam Ejus donis ct dotibus quas consccravit proavorum pietas, 
 Bpoliare. Ne longiiis autem quam par est te detineamus, commen- 
 damus tibi, Pater Revereudissiiue, in nomine Clcri Domus Inferioris, 
 liunc Virum eximium; rogantes ut, ])ro tua beniguitate, in ofEciuni 
 ct munus Prolocutoris, seu Refendarii, Domus nostras acceptum et 
 approbatum confirmes. 
 
 Tbe Archiusuop — Vir bonoratissime et admodum reverende, 
 suffragia cleri libenter confirmo, quibus tu domus inferioris 
 bujusce Convocations Prolocutor electus es. Decanus Lich- 
 fieldensis, qui tot per annos, in boc munere, miro modo amorem 
 ct rcverentiam omnium sibi conciliavit, tibi exemplar erit, quantum 
 possit mitis sapientia, incorrupta fides, in rebus arduis con- 
 stantia, in laboribus industria. Nec te ignotum accipimus, 
 jam per multos annos in bujusce domus congregationem summa 
 omnium laude adscriptum, priusquam per Reginaa Nostra; favorem 
 in decanatum merito provectus es. Bene scio, vir admodum 
 reverende, quo modo possis leni moderamine studia partium tem- 
 pcrare. Gravia negotia in bac synodo tractanda sunt. Anteces- 
 sors nostri, summo labore, munus difficillimum iis a Regia Majestate 
 commissum perfecerunt. Hoc tamcn nobis rcstat — nec leve munus — 
 ut bujusce Anglicana3 et totius Ecclesia; Domini nostri Jesu Christi 
 conditionem contemplemur, Fidem Catbolicam defendamus, sasculi 
 vitiis strenuo resistamus, labantibus, foris domique, pie succurramus. 
 Instant periciila. Per gentes nonnullas Orientales dura hodie regnat 
 egestas, et fideles, srevis pcrsecutoribus oppressi, Ecclesia; Anglicana; 
 auxilium invocant. Nobis sit, quibus Deus Optimus Maximus tot 
 beneficia dedit, lucem evangelii promovere, nosmet ipsos et concives 
 nostros in omnibus rebus secundum Christi legem moderari, fide, 
 sapientia, et cbaritate, in Christi Ecclesiam amorem omnium con- 
 ciliare. Ad quem finem, vir admodum reverende, dabis operam tu 
 omnia qua; huic synodo proposita sint, sedulo peragantur. 
 
24 
 
 PRESENTATION uF PROLOCUTOR. 
 
 The Prolocutor — Faucis tibi verbis, Prasses spcctatissime, gratias 
 agere velim, quod rac Prolocutorem jam ccetus convocati suffragiis 
 rennntiatum tain benigne accepisti tam counter et libcralitatc vere 
 tua comprobatum affirruavisti. Id munus quam indignus sum qui 
 obtineam, nulli magis quam mihimet ipsi pcrsuasum est. UtiDam 
 mihi lingua esset, qua qua? sentirem incorrupta Latini sermonis 
 intcgritate proferre possem ! Mihi vero parum contigit utad fontea 
 cos accederem, unde mira ilia concinnitas ct elegantia loquendi deri- 
 rature. Uccst mihi literarum istarum cultus ac peritia; deest diccndi 
 vis ac ratio. Ergo, quum necesse sit, ope alterius non meii ipsius 
 cloqucntia fretus, ea qua? sentio apud to, Pater Reverendissime, pro- 
 fitcbor. Non me fallit profecto, quam difficile mihi sit opus pcra- 
 gendum. Quis enim nescit, quanto labore, diligentia, fortitudine 
 utcndum sit, ut, qui convocati fuerint, fratres meos bene ac 
 felicitcr rcgam, tempercm, prudenter atque humaniter quoad possim 
 si quis rectum ordinem evagatus fucrit, cocrceam, iutemperantcr 
 disputantibus, si quando evenerit, frasna injiciam? Id certe mihi 
 commodo erit, quod tamdiu domus nostra? inferioris in conciliis 
 vcrsatus exercitat usque, quali opus sit discipline, quali moderatione, 
 quali finuitae animi et constantia, id satis cognitum ac perspecturu 
 Labco. Neque non multum profucrit, virum ilium ante oculos pro- 
 ponere exemplum, qui rude jam donatus Prolocutoris officio se 
 abdicavit, quanto omnium desiderio, quo araore et observautia, 
 quam insigni laude, quam dulci rcrum gestarum memoria ornatus! 
 Ego vero id agam, ut quibus in rebus me tibi prassto adesse opus 
 fuerit, maudata tua hinc illiuc nuutiandi rcnuntiandi causa, semper 
 promptus, semper fidelis, semper tibi cx animo obtemperare velim. 
 Adsit tantum, oro, ptcosens Deus. Deo adjuvante, Bpero fore nt 
 neque Ecclesia Anglicana nec ccetus illc convocatus cui prassidcrc 
 nunc meum est, ullum per me olim capiat detrimentum. 
 
 Their lordships then retired. 
 
 Upon the application of the Prolocutor, his Grace gave permis- 
 sion for the Minutes of the last Convocation to be laid on the table, 
 and for the presence of strangers in this House, subject to the dis- 
 cretion of the Prolocutor; and also sanctioned the reappointment of 
 those Committees of this House which had been appointed during 
 the last Convocation, by the direction of the Upper House, and 
 which had not been discharged before the dissolution of the late 
 Convocation, if this House should think fit. 
 
 His Grace the President and their lordships the Bishops then 
 withdrew. 
 
Address to ( 
 the Queen. \ 
 
 UPPER HOUSE— June 1. 
 
 25 
 
 Session III. — Tuesday, June 1, 1880. 
 
 UPPER HOUSE. 
 
 The members of the Upper House assembled in the Bounty - 
 ofiico at two o'clock. His Grace the ARCHBISHOP presided. There 
 were also present the Bishops of London, Winchester, Llandnfi', 
 Bangor, Hereford, St. Albans, Salisbury, Lincoln, Bath and Wells, 
 Oxford, Exeter, St. Asaph, Ely, Truro, Rochester, Chichester, and 
 Lichfield. Prayers were rei.d. 
 
 PETITIONS. 
 
 By the President — from Woodbridge, for an increase in the 
 number of Proctors. 
 
 By the Bisnor of Hereford — from the Clergy of Hereford, on the 
 same subject. 
 
 By the Bishop of Ely — from the Clergy of Ely, on tbe same 
 subject. 
 
 THE ADDRESS TO THE QUEEN. 
 
 The Bishop of London — It is the custom and the duty of Con- 
 vocation at its first meeting to address lier Majesty the Queen, 
 under whose gracious mandate it assembles. We meet on the 
 present occasion after the Sessions of one of the longest Convoca- 
 tions within my remembrance, and it will be well not to begin the 
 Sessions of another without casting the eye of memory backward. 
 Meeting, as it did, with her Majesty's Letters of Business, which 
 were renewed, it passed a great part of its time in very carefully 
 going through the Rubrics of our Prayer-book, with a view to 
 suggesting any amendments which, on the whole, it was thought 
 desirable should be made. I need not dwell on the large amount 
 of care and attention which was expended on that work. The 
 review was made over and over again in both Houses, and it was 
 not till after the most serious and protracted deliberations that the 
 Report was made, which, before Convocation closed, was signed and 
 directed to be forwarded to her Majesty. Whatever may be the 
 result of that labour, the Church of England will bear witness in 
 future times that if it does not lead to any improvement it was not 
 for want of the most anxious care on the part of those to whom the 
 task was intrusted. The schedule containing the amendments on 
 which Convocation finally agreed was placed by his Grace in the 
 hands of her Majesty's Secretary of State, and this having been 
 done, Convocation had discharged its part of the undertaking. 
 
26 UPPER HOUSE— June 1. (Address to 
 
 { the Queen. 
 
 We must not forget, however, that during the time in which Con- 
 cation was sitting a very large and most important addition was 
 made to the ecclesiastical machinery — if I may use the word 
 without offence— of the Church of England. We have seen 
 during that time a Bill passed which enables four new dioceses to 
 bo added to the two which had already been added before. 
 
 The Bishop of Winchester— The whole six were added during 
 the Sessions of the last Convocation. 
 
 The Bishop of London— That makes the retrospect even more 
 interesting. We have seen the actual addition of three new 
 dioceses to the Church of England, with a prospect of the power of 
 creating three more, and in one of these dioceses we have seen very 
 lately the foundations laid of a cathedral — I suppose the only new 
 cathedral which has been attempted to be built in England for the 
 last four hundred years. The interest taken in this great work has 
 been proved by the presence of the Heir to the Throne, the Prince 
 of Wales, in his capacity especially as Duke of Cornwall, at the 
 laying of the first stone of the new cathedral at Truro. It is 
 impossible to predict what business will be placed before the Con- 
 vocation which now meets, but at any rate we are anxious that our 
 very first act shall be to assure her Majesty of our attachment to 
 her Throne and person, and to ask the blessing of Almighty God 
 on her and on her family. Therefore I move that your lordships 
 should agree to the following Address: — 
 
 Madam— We, your Majesty's faithful subjects, the Archbishop and Bishops 
 of the Province of Canterbury, in Convocation assembled, approach your 
 Majesty with the assurance of our loyal and affectionate attachment to your 
 Majesty's Throne and person. 
 
 We rejoice that it has pleased Almighty God to keep your Majesty in 
 health and strength since we last had the honour of addressing the Throne, 
 and wo pray that your Majesty may be long preserved to reign over a loyal 
 and united people. 
 
 The last Convocation of the Province of Canterbury endeavoured to discharge 
 the duty which your Majesty graciously committed to it in the Roval Letters 
 of Business issued on the 6th July, 1871, 
 
 The result of their deliberations was, on the loth day of August last, placed 
 in the hands of your Majesty's Principal Secretary of State. 
 
 _ We desire to take this opportunity of thanking your Majesty for having 
 given the Royal Assent in Parliament to Bills designed, under the guidance of 
 Divine Providence, to extend the usefulness of the Church of England, by 
 increasing the number of its homo dioceses, and thus providing for the more 
 efficient discharge of the duties of the Episcopal office, so as to promote the 
 highest good of your Majesty's subjects. 
 
 We rejoice that three of the six new sees, for the foundation of which 
 arrangements have been made in Parliament, with your Majesty's consent, are 
 already endowed by the munificence of your Majesty's subjects, and that the 
 Bishops of those sees have been appointed. 
 
 It is a great satisfaction to us to know that in one of these dioceses — that 
 of Truro— his Royal Highness the Prince of Wales was pleased to be present 
 as Duke of Cornwall, and personally to take a part in the foundation of a new 
 cathedral. 
 
 We believe the Church of England retains its hold over the affections of 
 your Majesty's subjects, and that while its usefulness is dailv increasing, it is 
 spreading throughout all the dependencies of your Majesty's "Empire, and has 
 
Address to I UPPER HOUSE — June 1. 27 
 
 the Queen. J 
 
 of late years conciliated to itself in a remarkable degree the regard of many 
 other Christian Churches throughout the world. 
 
 It has been represented to us that our Convocation might better discharge 
 its duties if some addition were made to its number of Proctors in the Lower 
 House, and we desire to bring this subject under the consideration of your 
 Majesty. 
 
 Wo would conclude with the prayer that the blessing of Almighty God may 
 rest upon your Majesty and upon every member of your Koyal house. 
 
 The Bishop of Winchester — I have great pleasure in seconding 
 the proposal of the Bishop of London, that this Address to her 
 Majesty ho accepted hy your lordships' House. I have not many 
 words to say on the subject; but I think wo may congratulate 
 ourselves on the conclusion of our labours on the Prayer-book, and 
 not only on the conclusion of our labours, but also to a certain 
 extent on the fact that those labours were protracted, because the 
 very length of those labours has shown how much there is in the 
 Prayer-book which commends itself to the feelings of ourselves and 
 of our people. The great value of the Prayer-book consists in the 
 excellence of its prayers and of its teaching. This excellence was 
 so great that we felt it difficult to deal with the Prayer-book as a 
 whole, and I do not think anybody who has attempted to improve 
 it can have risen from the task without a conviction that the essence 
 of it is so good that only in small details does it require to be altered. 
 As regards the question of the increase of the number of Bishops, 
 for which the late Ministry brought in three different Bills, I think 
 I may venture to feel personal gratification in the division of my 
 own diocese, inasmuch as that was the first measure ; and that I, 
 however humble, was myself the means in first proposing that 
 measure to the Government, which set on foot, so to speak, the 
 movement of the whole question. It is a subject of the greatest 
 gratification to us to know that we have already in our House to- 
 day two Bishops who, but for those Bills, would not have been 
 amongst us, and that we not only see them here present, but have 
 witnessed their indefatigable and efficient labours in the two new 
 dioceses committed to their care. As to the increase of the number 
 of Proctors in Convocation, we know there has been a strong feeling 
 among the Clergy for a very long time in favour of a greater 
 representation of the parochial Clergy. If her Majesty and her 
 advisors should think it good to further this extension no doubt it 
 would be gratefully .accepted by the Clergy generally. At the same 
 time, I think we need not suppose that the Clergy are not on the 
 whole to a very great extent represented at present. A large body 
 of persons are taken from every class of the Clergy — Deans, Arch- 
 deacons, Canons, and parochial Clergy. These work side by side 
 most harmoniously in the Lower House of Convocation, and the 
 result of their deliberations is usually wise and skilful, and such 
 as to commend itself generally to the Clergy and to the Church. 
 Although I myself should be very glad to see the representation 
 enlarged, I have but little misgiving as to the efficiency of the 
 Lower House as now constituted, and as it has been constituted 
 
28 UPPER HOUSE— June 1. \Addren to 
 
 {the Queen. 
 
 since the thirteenth century; but of course the population has 
 greatly increased, and the number of the parochial Clergy has 
 likewise largely increased, while the number of dignitaries has been 
 comparatively stationary. Therefore it seemed to be a reasonable 
 desire that the number of the representatives of the parochial Clergy 
 in the Lower House of Convocation should also be increased. The 
 last Convocation not only sat for a very long time, but its labours 
 were unusually grave and efficient. Perhaps more has been done 
 by the Convocation in the last six years than has, perhaps, been 
 done by Convocation in any equally long period of our history. 
 For that we cannot but be thankful. I hope that our labours will 
 commend themselves both to the Clergy and the people of this 
 country, and that the blessing of Cod will rest on our past labours, 
 and still more abundantly on the labours of the Convocation which 
 is now about to sit. I have great pleasure in seconding the motion 
 that the Address to the Queen be adopted by this House. 
 
 The Bishop of Lincoln — I wish to say a few words with reference 
 to the new sees. The diocese to be created by God's help as a 
 new diocese in your Grace's province is that which is to be formed 
 of a portion of the diocese of Lichfield and a portion of my own. 
 With regard to the needs of these two dioceses, I think there is no 
 necessity for me to say a single word, but I shall be thankful if the 
 voice of the Bishop of Lichfield, as well as my own, is raised in 
 prayer to God in the first instance, and then that a humble suppli- 
 cation should go forth from this room that the faithfwl of the 
 Church of England will assist us in endeavouring to discharge, as 
 well as we can, a duty which is enough to crush the energies of 
 men much younger than I am, and which I nm afraid will overtax 
 the energies of one who is junior to myself — the Bishop of Lichfield. 
 I hope it will please God to relieve us from this burden, which is 
 far too much to be placed on human shoulders. I trust that the 
 new diocese of Southwell will be speedily formed. 
 
 The Bishop of Lichfield — I wish to add what weight my words 
 may have to those just uttered by the Bishop of Lincoln, with 
 reference to the extreme urgency for the creation of this new 
 Bishopric. I do so not so much in the interest of myself, as the 
 Bishop of the diocese to be relieved, as I do in the interest of the 
 people committed to my charge. I believe the diocese of Lichfield, 
 even as diminished by the operation of the new acts, will be 
 sufficient to tax and to overtax the energies of any individual 
 Bishop. I doubt whether any sensible relief will be given to the 
 Bishop by the proposed change, as all his strength will be required 
 for the diocese still remaining under his charge. At the same 
 time, I believe the change will mnke a great difference to the Clergy 
 and the Laity of the diocese. They will be able to see much more 
 frequently the Bishop under whom they arc placed, and they will 
 have the advantage of his friendly counsel and sympathy in a 
 manner which is quite impossible with the present vast area that is 
 included within these two dioceses of Lichfield and Lincoln. 
 
Sunday Closing ) 
 of Public-houses. J 
 
 UPPER HOUSE— June 1. 
 
 REFORM OF CONVOCATION'. 
 
 The PRESIDENT — I have in my band a petition addressed to the 
 Upper House of Convocation by Clergy in the neighbourhood of 
 Woodbridge, in the diocese of Norwich. The petitioners express 
 their opinion that it has now become necessary that the number of 
 Proctors of the parochial Clergy in the Lower House of Convocation 
 should be considerably increased. Mention is made here of what is 
 supposed to be a contrast in this respect between the provinces of 
 Canterbury and York. In York the archdeaconry is taken as the 
 unit, and in Canterbury the diocese is taken as the unit. I do not 
 know whether it is the wish of those who present these petitions 
 that there should be a representation for every archdeaconry 
 throughout England. That would be a serious matter if it left the 
 great diocese of London with four representatives, while six were 
 conferred on the diocese of Peterborough. That would appear to 
 be a redudio ad absurdum, unless an alteration were to be made in 
 the number of archdeaconries by increasing them in London or 
 decreasing them in other dioceses. 
 
 SUNDAY CLOSING OF PUBLIC-HOUSES. 
 
 The Bishop of London presented a petition from the Central 
 Association for Stopping the Sale of Intoxicating Liquors on 
 Sunday: — 
 
 That your petitioners believe that the sale of intoxicating liquor on Sunday 
 is a fruitful source of intemperance, domestic misery, pauperism, and crime. 
 
 That it is injurious to those engaged in the trade, to their families, and their 
 servants. 
 
 That in all respects it is most prejudicial to the welfare of the people of this 
 country, and presents the most serious obstacles to all Christian effort for 
 ameliorating their condition. 
 
 That your petitioners rejoice to know that there exists in this country a 
 strong desire that, except in the case of lodgers and bon/l fide travellers, 
 public-houses should be closed during the whole of Sunday, and that it is 
 found from the canvass of the householders in more than 400 places, that 
 r.7.-j,o!)S householders have expressed themselves in favour of this measure, and 
 only 77,963 stated their opposition to it, and that 18,572 were neutral. 
 
 That in 1878 three memorials in favour of this restriction were presented to 
 the Home Secretary, and these had been signed by 6,876 Bishops and Clergy 
 of the Church of England, 6,696 Nonconformist ministers, and 887 Roman 
 Catholic Bishops and Clergy. 
 
 That legislation for this object would not bo experimental, for it has boon 
 in operation throughout Scotland for twenty-four years, and has produced a 
 great diminution of drunkenness and crime, and now the consumption of 
 British spirits per head in that country is 25 per cent, less than it was before 
 the salutary legislation was adopted. 
 
 That a similar regulation has been in force in nine-tenths of Ireland sinco 
 the 13th of October, 1878, and has caused a diminution of 70 per cent, in 
 Sunday drunkenness. 
 
 That in the Isle of Man and in several of our colonies the same legislative 
 arrangement has been enforced for a number of years with the most satisfac- 
 tory results. 
 
 That your petitioners therefore believe that the stopping of the sale of 
 intoxicating liquors on Sunday, except in the case of lodgers and bon& fide 
 
30 UPPER HOUSE— JUNE 1. f Sunday Closing 
 
 I of Public-houses. 
 
 travellers, would be productive of great benefits in England and Wales, and 
 pray your lordships to adopt the measures which in your wisdom you deem 
 best for obtaining for our beloved country the legislation which has been 
 productive of such great benefits in other portions of her Majesty's dominions. 
 And your petitioners will ever pray. 
 
 Signed by EOBBKT Wninvoinn (and others), 
 Hon. Secretaries to the Central Association for Stopping the Sale of 
 Intoxicating Liquors on Sunday. 
 His lordship said — I have great satisfaction in presenting this 
 petition, for it appeai-s to me the time has come when the experi- 
 ence of the past may fairly be pleaded for further legislation in this 
 direction. Of course what the effect would be of stopping the sale 
 of intoxicating liquors on Sunday might be argued beforehand, but 
 could only be proved after trial. It has now had a trial of many 
 years in Scotland, of some years in many of our colonies, and for a 
 more limited period in Ireland, where the experiment may be called 
 even more crucial; and in every case the result has been the same — 
 namely, a considerable diminution in the consumption of spirituous 
 liquors, and a still greater diminution in the number of cases of 
 intoxication brought before the public. With regard to Ireland, it 
 must be admitted that during a part of the time in which the new 
 law has been in operation there has been a great amount of scarcity 
 and suffering, and that must be credited with some portion of 
 the diminution; but, making every allowance for that, there can be 
 no doubt that Sunday closing in Ireland has been followed 
 by a considerable diminution in intoxication. Of course this state- 
 ment is contradicted. I have received letters from a society con- 
 sisting of publicans, in which they direct attention to the large 
 number of cases of drunkenness that occurred in Sligo. One reply 
 was that the police there were in a very efficient state, but whether 
 that excuse is needed or not, Sligo is the only case which these 
 parties who are so deeply interested in the question can adduce. I 
 may fairly infer that in all other parts of Ireland the effect of the 
 Act has been as stated. One point in this matter is very much in 
 my mind — namely, the extreme cruelty of the present system to the 
 barmaids and other persons who are employed in public-houses. 
 We have laws regulating the hours of labour in almost every other 
 trade, but we have none in this. In London barmaids are kept up 
 almost as late on Sundays as on week-days, and their constitutions 
 wear out under the system. Merely on that ground something 
 ought to be done to relieve an evil with reference to this class of 
 servants. I need hardly say, however, that the evil extends far 
 beyond that. As a matter of fact, there is a larger consumption of 
 spirituous liquors and more intoxication on Sunday than on any 
 other day of the week. The labouring man, no doubt, must have 
 his beer on Sunday, as on other days, and perhaps that is the only 
 day on which he can enjoy his dinner with his family. Still, we 
 know by experience that beer drawn on the previous day, and 
 properly bottled and corked, comes out as well next day as if it were 
 just drawn from the tap. I don't know whether it is possible for 
 
Sunday Closing} UPPER HOUSE— June 1. 
 
 of PMichouses. ) 
 
 31 
 
 Convocation to take any steps in tin's matter; but, at all events, we 
 have an opportunity of expressing oar opinions on it, and our hope 
 that legislation will be introduced to cure this evil, as has been done 
 already to a great extent in Scotland and Ireland. 
 
 The Bishop OF Lichfield — If Convocation takes up this question, 
 it is very important that wc should be careful not to be led away by 
 deductions from the statistics. The circumstances of Scotland and 
 Ireland are essentially different from those of England. Whereasjiu 
 England the ordinary intoxicating liquor consumed by the working 
 man is beer, in Scotland and Ireland it is whiskey, which, unlike 
 beer, could be easily kept in the people's houses. I have been told 
 that the closing of public-houses in Ireland, and in some villages in 
 England, has resulted in a considerable increase of drinking among 
 women, who rarely go to a public-house, but who have a temptation 
 brought into their own houses by the new arrangement. Besides, 
 nothing is more likely to damage the cause of temperance than any- 
 thing like exaggerated language or unwise measures. In my opinion 
 it would be better to close public-houses on Sundays, excepting for 
 one hour in the middle of the day at dinner-time, and one hour at 
 night for supper-time, and to prohibit absolutely the consumption 
 of liquor on the premises on Sundays. This would be far better 
 than aiming at such a sweeping measure as is indicated in the 
 petition. 
 
 The Bishop of Llandaff — I have never been able to satisfy 
 myself that it would be an act of justice to close the public-houses 
 altogether on Sunday. The mere fact of drunkenness having been 
 diminished by Sunday closing does not appear to me to be a proof 
 of the desirability of shutting them up altogether. Of course, when 
 facilities for drinking are taken away, there must necessarily be 
 much less intoxication. This, however, does not quite decide the 
 question, for there are certain disadvantages on the other side 
 which ought to be borne in mind. It would be very hard if a poor 
 man could not get a wholesome glass of beer for his dinner on 
 Sunday. Moreover, this kind of legislation makes a very great 
 difference between the rich and the poor. These two considerations 
 are rather a set-off against what has been said with regard to the 
 diminution of drunkenness in places where Sunday closing has been 
 adopted. I do not feel that I am quite satisfied on the subject. 
 
 The President — I may remind your lordships that this subject is 
 one to which great attention was given by Convocation some time 
 ago, and that the Reports published, both of this Convocation and 
 that of York, were exceedingly valuable in enlightening the public 
 mind on the subject. I may also remind your lordships that a 
 Committee of the House of Lords went fully into the subject, and in 
 all probability some legislation founded on the Report of that Com- 
 mittee will before long find its way into Parliament; but at present 
 no Bill has been brought before us in Parliament for our considera- 
 tion. 
 
32 
 
 UPPER HOUSE— June 1. 
 
 [Family Prayers. 
 
 FAMILY PRAYERS. 
 
 Tlio Bishop of Exeter — I was going to propose the reappoint- 
 ment of the Committee on Family Prayers. In the last Convocation 
 a Committee was appointed to prepare a form of family prayers, 
 and that Committee made its report towards tlie end of the last 
 sitting of Convocation, and by the authority of this House permis- 
 sion was given to publish the Report, together with the forms of 
 prayer which had been prepared, and to invite suggestions for 
 amendments and alterations from all persons who might be 
 interested in the matter. That book was published accordingly 
 with an invitation for such suggestions, and it has had a fair sale. 
 Up to the present time between G,000 and 7,000 copies have been 
 sold, and I am informed that the sale still continues, and a good 
 many suggestions have been sent in to be considered by the Com- 
 mittee. The Committee, of course, ceased to exist as soon as the 
 late Convocation ceased to exist, and I would now venture to 
 propose that the Committee be reappointed, and that the Report 
 should be referred back to them to consider the suggestions that 
 have been made, and to report to the House as soon as possible on 
 these suggestions if they think fit to adopt any of them. 
 
 The Bishop of Lincoln — I have great pleasure in seconding the 
 motion. 
 
 The President — Have copies of the Report been circulated ? 
 
 The Bishop of Exeter — Yes; the Report is in the book. 
 
 The Bishop of Lincoln — I venture to demur to the superscription 
 on the cover, because it looks as if the Order of Family Prayers 
 contained in the book had been authorised by the Upper House of 
 Convocation. The fact is, that the publication was authorised, 
 but the prayers were not authorised, and I cannot help thinking 
 that the superscription on the cover might mislead persons, and lead 
 them to think that this House is responsible for whatever is in this 
 volume. 
 
 The Bishop of Llandaff — I think the House has some cause of 
 complaint, because the book, which is to be had in this country and 
 in New York, is made to appear by the superscription on the cover 
 as if it had the sanction of Convocation. 
 
 The Bishop of Lichfield — When this matter came before the 
 last Convocation I ventui'ed to submit that we should take this 
 form of prayers into our own chapel, so that by experiment we 
 might see their merits or defects. I have myself done so. I 
 share the feeling of the Bishop of Llandaff. After what passed 
 in this House, I thought it was or.ly to be published in a quasi- 
 private way, and I was surprised to find that it was published as if 
 by authoi-ity of Convocation. I think there ought to be some 
 modification of the superscription. 
 
 The Bishop of Winchester — As I understood, the book was to 
 be published with a view of testing the prayers prior to their 
 
Church in > UPPER HOUSE— JoitE 1. 33 
 
 Liberia. J 
 
 adoption. It seems to me desirable tliat the alterations which have 
 been suggested should be considered now. 
 
 The Bishop of Llandaff said he had a distinct recollection of 
 what took place at the last Convocation, and he was certain they 
 gave uo authorisation for the publication of the book, with, such a 
 statement as that it was published with the authority of the House. 
 
 The Bishop of Winchester — It was to be published in order to 
 its being tested. 
 
 The Bishop of Salisbury thought that the title-page was open 
 to criticism, but nothing bad been done but what had been autho- 
 rised. It was thought of the greatest importance that the book 
 should be circulated, and that suggestions should bo invited. He 
 sbould have thought that the criticisms which their lordships had 
 to make should have been made to the Committee. 
 
 The Bishop of Lincoln moved that the Chairman of the Com- 
 mittee be requested so to alter the statement on the cover of the 
 book as to make it read " Family Prayers prepared by a Committee 
 of the Upper House of Convocation," instead of "Family 
 Prayers by Authority of Convocation." 
 
 The President read extracts from the Minutes of what took place 
 when the matter was last before the House, to the effect that the 
 Committee make arrangements for publishing the form of family 
 prayers. The Committee, his Grace remarked, seemed to have 
 power to do anything they liked. 
 
 The Bishop of Lincoln's motion was then put and carried. 
 
 THE CHURCH IN LIBERIA. 
 
 The President — I have promised to lay before your lordships a 
 letter respecting the Church of Liberia, in North Africa. It appears 
 that that body was desirous of obtaining the Episcopal service of the 
 American missionary Bishop of Cape Palmas, and they thought 
 that an expression of opinion from this House, wishing them God- 
 speed, would have a great effect in inducing the American Bishop to 
 listen to their request. Their memorial has been sent to the Con- 
 vention of the Episcopal Church of America. As your lordships 
 are aware, Liberia is an independent State, and the case is 
 analogous to that of Hayti, which was brought before your lordships 
 some months ago. This is one of the many proofs of the accuracy 
 of what we have stated in our Address to the Crown, that in various 
 scattered parts of the world people are looking anxiously for such 
 co-operation and assistance as the Church of England is able to give. 
 I think I may take it for granted that these people have our 
 sympathy, and that your lordships think that the American Episcopal 
 Church would do well to assent to the request of these people in 
 Liberia, so that they may have regularly authorised Episcopal 
 service. 
 
 The schedule of prorogation was then read, by which the sitting 
 stood prorogued to the following day. 
 
 D 
 
34 
 
 LOWER HOUSE— June 1. 
 
 ( Notices of 
 
 \ Motion. 
 
 LOWER HOUSE. 
 
 Prayers wore said by the PROLOCUTOR, and the Pryeconization was 
 made by the Actuary; the Minutes of the Session of Friday, the 
 30th April last, were read and confirmed and ordered to be reduced 
 into Acts, according to the ancient practice of Convocation. 
 
 The Prolocutor named as his Assessors for the present Session 
 the Deans of St. Paul's, Westminster, and Bangor; the Arch- 
 deacons of Canterbury, Maidstone, Lewes, and Bristol; Canons 
 Norris, Bright, Butler; and Prebendary Gibbs. 
 
 The Prolocutor — Before proceeding with the business of the day, 
 I wish to express my thanks to the House for the great honour 
 which it has conferred upon me by placing me in this chair. In 
 the learned speech which I made an hour ago, and which, as I said, 
 was not my own composition, I could not help smiling at those 
 gracefully turned sentences which referred to the guiding of our 
 debates and the difficulty of keeping order. They were, I thought, 
 scarcely applicable to this House, which is remarkable for the calm 
 and temperate way in which its discussions are carried on. The 
 odium theologicum is quite unknown to us. I will, however, do my 
 best to assist you in your work, and great as I feel the honour of 
 being placed in this seat, it is the more valued on account of the 
 kind way in which that honour was conferred. I shall best express 
 my sense of your kindness by a determination to discharge the 
 duties of the position in the best way within my power; and if I 
 fail the House will forgive me. My difficulties seem all the greater 
 when I remember how well those duties have been performed for so 
 many years by our late Prolocutor. There is one point in which I 
 certainly cannot even attempt to follow his example. It was his 
 custom, as most of you know, to give us at our first meeting every 
 year an able and oft-times a touching and affecting account of those 
 who since our separation were removed by death, or any other 
 cause. All men have their special gifts, and the ability proper to 
 do that is not mine. I regret that he is not now sitting beside me 
 to discharge that duty. Wc shall indeed miss his calm and judicial 
 mind if he should choose to absent himself from our deliberations, 
 which I am quite sure we all hope he will not do. 
 
 Canon Butler — I wish to give notice that at the earliest oppor- 
 tunity I shall move a vote of thanks to our late Prolocutor for his 
 long and faithful services. 
 
 NOTICES OF MOTION. 
 
 The Archdeacon of Taunton gave notice that with respect to the 
 election of Proctors for Clergy he should, as early as possible, 
 propose the following draft preamble and resolutions: — 
 
 " That whereas the parochial Clergy are exposed, in the exercise of the 
 
Standing Orders.} LOWER HOUSE — June 1. 
 
 35 
 
 franchise in respect of election of Proctors for Convocation, to trouble, incon- 
 venience, and expense, amounting in many cases to practical disenfranchisc- 
 ment, it appears to this Uouse : — 
 
 " 1. That it is advisable that the remedy for this anomaly be found, so far 
 as the Province of Canterbury is concerned, in some general arrangement 
 recommended by this Uouse, and having the sanction of his Grace the 
 Archbishop, President of the Synod, and their lordships the Bishops of the 
 Upper House, rather than left to several arrangement in the several dioceses of 
 the province. 
 
 " 2. That the remedy heroinbelow proposed appears to be simple, easy, 
 inexpensive, and free from substantial objection: — 
 
 " (a) That the Mandate for election having been received in due course of 
 law, and transmitted by the Bishop to his Archdeacons, with day named by the 
 Bishop for assembling of the Archdeacons, with the Chancellor of the Diocese, 
 or his official, at the usual place of election for the purpose of receiving nomi- 
 nations of candidates signed by proposers and seconders (the day so named 
 being not less than fourteen days after such transmission), the several Arch- 
 deacons proceed to communicate the same to the Rural Deans and assistant 
 Rural Deans of the archdeaconry by printed form ; such form to contain also 
 the day of election named by the Bishop ; 
 
 " (b) That the nominations so signed and received be communicated forth- 
 with by the several Archdeacons to the Rural Deans and assistant Rural Deans 
 upon printed forms to be supplied by the Archdeacons for that purpose, with 
 request that they will collect the votes of the Clergy in each deanery or division 
 of it, and transmit them upon the same forms under their hand, within a given 
 day, to the Archdeacon ; 
 
 " (c) That the Archdeacons, with the Chancellor of the Diocese, or his 
 official, again assemble, at the usual place of election, upon the day named by 
 the Bishop, open the voting-papers, and declare elected the candidates having 
 the greater number of votes ; the return of such election to be made as hereto- 
 fore ; 
 
 " (d) That if no candidate bo nominated beside those returned for the 
 previous Convocation, the election be declared, and return made as above 
 accordingly ; 
 
 " (e) That in the event of any unforeseen vacancy occurring between trans- 
 mission of Mandate and return of election, the Bishop at his discretion take 
 order for providing for such contingency." 
 
 Archdeacon Earle — " That his Grace the President be respect- 
 fully requested to direct the appointment of a Committee of the 
 Lower House, to consider the status of the unbeneficed Clergy 
 with reference to their representation in Convocation." 
 
 Canon Gregory — " That any Resolution of this House, upon which 
 it is intended that the co-operation of the Upper House should be 
 asked, shall be confirmed at a subsequent sitting of the House, not 
 taking place on the same day with the passing of the Resolution of 
 this House, and that no Resolution be taken to the Upper House 
 until it has been so confirmed." 
 
 STANDING ORDERS. 
 
 In answer to a question whether it was competent to move an 
 ameiulment to the Standing Orders at this stage, 
 
 The Prolocutor said — Any such proposition cannot be discussed 
 without notice; and, as we cannot go on without Standing Orders, 
 I suggest that the old ones should be accepted provisionally. 
 
 This was agreed to accordingly. 
 
 D 2 
 
3G 
 
 LOWER HOUSE— Joke 1. 
 
 [Finances. 
 
 PETITIONS. 
 
 The following petitions were presented: — 
 
 By Archdeacon Denisc-N — Signed by fourteen of the Clergy of 
 the llural Deanery of Axbridge, diocese Bath and Wells, in 
 favour of an improvement of the manner of electing Proctors for 
 the Clergy. 
 
 By Bisnor Parry — Signed by one Clergyman and two laymen, 
 diocese Manchester, against the sale of intoxicating liquors on 
 Sunday. 
 
 By Archdeacon Lear — Signed by himself on behalf of fourteen 
 of the Clergy of his Archdeaconry, against the Burial Laws 
 Amendment Act, 1880. 
 
 By Canon Angles— Signed by two Rural Deans, diocese Peter- 
 borough, for an increase in the number of representative Proctors 
 iu Convocation. 
 
 By Canon Barlow — Signed by four of the Clergy of the Rural 
 Deanery of South Malmesbury, diocese Gloucester and Bristol, as 
 to the right of the Sees of Gloucester and Bristol to be still 
 represented by four Proctors. 
 
 By Canon Yarde — Signed by five of the Clergy of the Rural 
 Deanery of Gosgote, diocese Peterborough, for more adequate 
 representation of the Clergy in this House. 
 
 FINANCES. 
 
 The following statement of the finances of the late Convocation 
 was read by Treasurer Gibbs, and ordered to be entered on the 
 Minutes: — 
 
 RECEIVED. 
 
 Balance in hand at Audit, February, 1879 £147 12 5 
 
 Share of expenses of 1878, contributed by the Upper House 74 1 6 
 
 Arrears of assessments made before 1879 53 0 0 
 
 Assessment made in 1879 183 0 0 
 
 £157 13 11 
 
 £31 10 0 
 27 11 0 
 
 £59 1 0 
 
 £4 10 0 
 8 18 G 
 130 4 0 
 18 8 G 
 230 7 G 
 5 0 0 
 
 397 9 0 
 
 1 3 11 
 
 £157 13 11 
 
 Examined and found correct. 
 
 MicnAEL Gibus. 
 Benjamin Harbison, 
 Robert Grecort. 
 
 EXPENDED. 
 
 Actuary for attendances in 1879 
 
 Disbursements and collecting 
 
 Stationery 
 
 Rush, for attendance 
 
 Paul, for Chronicle 
 
 West, for issuing ditto, &c 
 
 Nichols, for printing Reports of Committees, &c 
 
 Prolocutor's incidental expenses 
 
 Balance in hand 
 
Chairmen, frc, \ LOWER HOUSE— JUNE 1. 37 
 
 of Committees. ) 
 
 Treasurer Giisbs also read an account of the amount of expense 
 relating to 1879 — viz., 147?. 15s. 7d., due from the Upper House, 
 which he requested the Prolocutor to take up to their lordships. 
 
 On the motion of Treasurer Gibbs, seconded by Canon Rawli.v- 
 son, the House agreed to a voluntary assessment, for meeting the 
 expenses of the House for this year, of 1?. each Dean, 15s. eacli 
 Archdeacon and Proctor for a Chapter, and 10s. each Proctor for 
 the Clergy. 
 
 PETITIONS AND MATTERS PARLIAMENTARY. 
 
 Treasurer Gibbs — I beg to present the Report of three members 
 of the late Committee on Petitions and Matters Parliamentary, and 
 to move that it be printed for the use of Convocation. 
 
 Sir F. Gore Ouselet — I second the motion. 
 
 Agreed to. (See Appendix.) 
 
 chairmen and conveners of committees. 
 
 Treasurer Gibbs — In the last group of Sessions, I was 
 requested by the Prolocutor to draw up rules for the convenience 
 and guidance of Chairmen of Committees, and I now present a 
 draft of those rules. I move that it be referred to the Committee 
 on Standing Orders. 
 
 Sub-Dean Clements — I second the motion. 
 
 The Prolocutor — This is a most valuable paper, as, if adopted, 
 it will enable Conveners and Chairmen of Committees all to work on 
 one uniform system. 
 
 Agreed to. 
 
 CONVOCATION OF CANTERBURY. 
 
 DlKECriONS FOE TIIE GUIDANCE OF THE CONVENERS AND Cn AIRMEN OF COM- 
 MITTEES of tiie Lower House. 
 
 The Convener, on his appointment by the Prolocutor, is — 
 
 1. To obtain from the Actuary a list of the members of the Committee, and 
 the number to form a quorum, and a copy of the Minutes giving the date when, 
 and the purpose for which, the Committee was appointed. 
 
 2. To convene the members for the election of one of them to be the Chair- 
 man of the Committee. 
 
 3. To give to the Chairman the information obtained from the Actuary in 
 pursuance of the foregoing directions. 
 
 4. To inform the Prolocutor which member of the Committee has been 
 elected its Chairman. 
 
 The Chairman is — 
 
 1. To convene the members of the Committee from time to time, naming 
 the place and hour for their meeting. 
 
 2. To take Minutes of the business then transacted, or to procure some other 
 member of the Committee to do so. 
 
 3. To prepare a Draft Report, and cause the same, if necessary, to be 
 printed and sent to the members of the Committee for their individual private 
 consideration. 
 
 N.B. — The Report should commence thus : — 
 
38 
 
 LOWER HOUSE— JUNE 1. [Committees. 
 
 CONVOCATION OF CANTERBURY. 
 Lower House. 
 
 report of committee appointed [dated] ON [naming the subject]. 
 
 At the top of the first page it may be well to print (and to erase when the 
 Report is finally agreed to for presentation) Private, for the consideration of 
 the Committee only, who will meet to consider this Draft Ileport at 
 on at o'clock. 
 
 At the bottom of the first page of the Report the names of the members 
 forming the Committee must be printed ; see Standing Order XXXII. 
 
 4. To correct and alter the Draft Report until the Committee has agreed to 
 it and ordered it to be signed by the Chairman and presented to the Lower 
 House of Convocation. The Chairman will be careful to insert the date when 
 ho signs it. At the top of every page of the Report it will be convenient to 
 print the subject, as, for instance, Report on Clergy Discipline. 
 
 5. To append to the Report one or more resolutions drawn up with the 
 approval of the Committee, and to have them printed on a page distinct from 
 the Report and headed " Resolutions to be moved when this Report comes on 
 for discussion." 
 
 6. To order 500 copies of the Report to be printed, and to direct the printer 
 to keep 330 of them for the Chronicle, and to send the remaining 170 copies to 
 the Jerusalem Chamber addressed to the Chairman by name ; and also to keep 
 the typo standing until further order respecting it be given by the Prolocutor, 
 or some one deputed by him. When Minutes have been kept of (he Committee's 
 meetings it may be well that they should be handed to the Prolocutor when the 
 Report is presented to the House. 
 
 7. To present the Report to the Lower House, and then to move that it be 
 printed for the use of Convocation, and in due time to bring forward the dis- 
 cussion, in accordance with the Standing Order XXXIV. 2. 
 
 8. To inform Mr. Paul, at 3, Edith-cottages, West Kensington, S.W., the 
 owner and editor of the Chronicle of Convocation, that copies of the Report 
 (naming it) are at Messrs. Nichols, and will be delivered to him, or to his order, 
 for publication with the Chronicle for the current year. 
 
 COMMITTEES. 
 
 The Prolocutor — I have received permission from his Grace to 
 reappoint, if the House wishes it, all the Committees sitting at the 
 time of the dissolution of the last Convocation. I regret that we 
 shall lose the services of several very valuable members, amongst 
 whom I may especially mention the two Proctors for Hereford, 
 Mr. Joyce and Dr. Jebb. They are no doubt replaced by extremely 
 able men, but it would be difficult to find men exactly fitted to take 
 their places. Mr. Joyce was remarkable for his extensive know- 
 ledge of Church law, and in his way Dr. Jebb was equally remark- 
 able, besides the pcrfervidum ingenium which he brought to our 
 councils. I may mention that I hope some member will move for a 
 Committee to consider the propriety of appointing two Vice- 
 Prolocutors, either of whom will be ready to take the chair in the 
 absence of the Prolocutor. 
 
 Archdeacon Denisox — I made the same suggestion at the last 
 election of our late esteemed Prolocutor, as consistent with the 
 ancient practice of Convocation; and I now move that the subject 
 be remitted to the Committee of Privileges. 
 
 Canon Rawlinson — I second the motion. 
 
 Agreed to. 
 
Committees.'] 
 
 LOWER HOUSE— Juni: 1. 
 
 39 
 
 JOINT COMMITTEES. 
 
 The Prolocutor — I have received the permission of his Grace 
 the President to appoint members of this House on Joint Com- 
 mittees appointed during the late Convocation: — 
 
 Revision of the Authorised Version. — Bishops of Winchester, 
 Llandaff, Gloucester and Bristol, Salisbury, Bath and Wells; the 
 Prolocutor; Deans of Westminster, Canterbury, Ely, Rochester, 
 Lincoln, Lichfield, Llandaff; and Archdeacon Harrison. 
 
 Sisterhoods and Deaconesses. — The Bishops of Winchester, Lincoln, 
 and Oxford; the Prolocutor; Archdeacons Hessey, Sir G. Prevost, 
 and Ffoulkes; Canons Miller, Butler, Hopkins, and Stephens. 
 
 Aged and Infirm Clergymen. — The Bishops of London, Win- 
 chester, Lichfield, Gloucester and Bristol, Bangor, Ely, Peter- 
 borough; the Prolocutor; Deans of Winchester, Lichfield, and St. 
 Asaph; Archdeacons Buchanan and Holbech; Sub-Dean Clements; 
 Canons Miller, Gregory, Sapte, Lloyd, and Puckle; Prebendaries 
 Gibbs and Pigott. 
 
 Providing a Church Hume. — The Bishops of Winchester, Lich- 
 field, and Rochester; the Prolocutor; Archdeacons Hessey and 
 Bishop Piers Claughton; Canons Gregory, Miller, and Wilkinson. 
 
 [It was agreed that the following should bo the title of the 
 Committee appointed to deal with the subject of Education: — "A 
 Committee for considering the best means for securing that the 
 Children of this country be educated in the Principles of the 
 Church of England."] 
 
 COMMITTEES. 
 
 The following Committees were then appointed: — 
 
 Standing Orders. — The Prolocutor; the Dean of Lichfield; Arch- 
 deacons Harrison, Ady, Denison, Earle (convener) ; Canons Gregory, 
 Norris, Jeffreys, Lloyd; Prebendaries Gibbs and Ainslie. 
 
 Privileges. — The Prolocutor; Deans of St. Asaph, Liehlield, 
 Lincoln, Rochester; Archdeacons Harrison (convener), Bishop 
 Piers Claughton, Denison, Grant, Hopkins, Puckle, Ncvill, 
 Jeffreys; Prebendaries Gibbs, Ainslie, and Payne. 
 
 Gravamina et Hufurmanda, — The Prolocutor; Deans of St. Asaph 
 and Lichfield; Archdeacons Randall (convener) and Chapman; 
 Chancellor Harington ; Canons Harvey, Potter, and Vaughan; 
 Prebendary Gibbs. 
 
 Petitions and Hatters Parliamentary. — The Prolocutor; Arch- 
 deacons Harrison, Buchanan, and the Bishop of Nottingham; 
 Canons Gregory, Barlow, D. Williams, and Wilkinson; Prebendary 
 Gibbs (convener). 
 
 Library. — The Prolocutor; Dean of Westminster; Archdeacon 
 Jennings; Canons Prothcro (convener) and Wilkinson ; Prebendary 
 Gibbs. 
 
 Expenses. — The Prolocutor; Deans of Winchester and Lichfield; 
 
40 
 
 LOWER HOUSE— Jusk 1. 
 
 [Committees. 
 
 Archdeacons Denison, Jennings, and Burney; Canon Gregory; 
 Prebendary Gibbs (convener). 
 
 Election of Proctors for Convocation. — The Prolocutor; Deans of St. 
 Paul's and Lichfield ; Archdeacons Ady, Balston, Emery, Chapman, 
 Sir G. Prevost, Hessey, and Earle; Sir J. B. Philipps; Sub-Dean 
 Clements (convener); Canons Gregory, Miller, Barlow, Thynne ; 
 Prebendaries Gibbs and Sadler; Rev. R. C. Knight. 
 
 Disabled Clergymen. — The Prolocutor; Dean of Lichfield; Arch- 
 deacons Allen and Bishop Trollope; Canons Gregory, Hopkius 
 (convener), and Sumner; Prebendary Gibbs. 
 
 Occasional Services. — The Prolocutor; Deans of Lichfield and 
 Llandaff; Archdeacons Ady, Emery, Randall, Hessey, Lear, and 
 Earle; Sir F. Gore Onseley ; Canons Bright, Miller, Butler, Sumner, 
 Douglas, Jeffreys, Wilkinson, Yard (convener) ; Prebendaries Gibb3 
 and Sadler. 
 
 Law of Churchwardens and Church Beats. — The Prolocutor; Dean 
 of Lichfield; Archdeacons Hessey, Bathurst, Pott, Sanctuary, 
 Fearon, Ffoulkes, Chapman, Emery (convener), Hannah, lies, Ady, 
 Trollope, Sir G. Prevost; Canons Hopkins, filler, Puckle, Hinds 
 Howell, Prothero, D. Williams; Rev. R. C. Knight, 
 
 Clergy Discipline. — The Prolocutor; Deans of St, Paul's, Win- 
 chester, Chichester, Ely, Lichfield, Lincoln, and Rochester; Arch- 
 deacons Harrison, Bishop Piers Claughton, Pott, Sir G. Prevost, 
 Bishop McDougall, Maltby, Kaye, Grant; Canons Gi - egory, Butler, 
 Harvey, Perry, Hopkins, Erskine Clarke, Sumner; Sub-Dean 
 Clements; Prebendary Gibbs. 
 
 Spiritual Provision for English Sailors.— The Prolocutor; Arch- 
 deacons Randall (Bristol), Bishop of Dover, Bishop McDougall, 
 Nevill, Allen, Bishop of Nottingham (convener), Earle; Canons 
 Gregory, Hinds Howell, Puckle, Sumner, Bevan ; Chancellor 
 Phillips; Prebendaries Campion and Hockin. 
 
 Fallen Women. — The Prolocutor; Dean of Chichester; Arch- 
 deacons Randall (Buckingham), Bishop of Dover, Ady, Fearon, 
 Hessey, Ffoulkes. Hannah, Thickncsse, Earle, Bishop of Notting- 
 ham; Canons Gregory, Miller, Rawlinson, Butler, Hopkins, Miles 
 (convener), Puckle, Saptc, Yard; Prebendaries Ainslie, Campion, 
 Gibbs, Edwards. 
 
 Law of Discipline. — The Prolocutor; Deans of Lichfield, Peter- 
 borough, Chichester, St. Asaph; Archdeacons Harrison, Hessey, 
 Kaye, Palmer, Denison (convener) ; Canons Miller, Butler, 
 Sumner, Jeffreys, Miles, Yard, Douglas, and Hopkins; Prebendary 
 Gibbs. 
 
 Duties of Archdeacons. — The Prolocutor ; Dean of Lichfield; Arch- 
 deacons Hessey, Vesey, Hannah, Thickncsse, Cheetbam, Chapman, 
 Grant; Canons Bright, Hinds Howell, Miles. 
 
 Intercommunion.- — The Pi'olocutor; Dean of Lichfield; Arch- 
 
Committec?.~\ 
 
 LOWER HOUSE— June 1. 
 
 41 
 
 deacons Sir G. Provost, Lear, Denison, Hannah, Kayo; Canons 
 Perry, Butler, Yard (convener); Prebendaries Campion, Edwards, 
 Sadler; Revs. G. W. Pigott, W. Bree, J. Sinnett. 
 
 Board of Missions. — The Prolocutor; ArclideaconsBathurst, Emery, 
 Sir G. Prevost, Bishop McUougall, Buchanan; Sir P. Gore 
 Ouseley; Canons Wilkinson (convener), Lloyd, U. Williams, 
 Butler, Gregory; Sir J. E. Philipps ; Kcv. R. W. Hayward. 
 
 Firstfi-uits and Tenths. -The Prolocutor; Dean of Lichfield; Arch- 
 deacons Hcsscy, Grant, Pott, Jacob, Bathurst, Ffoulkes; Canons 
 Gregory, Hopkins, Potter, Pownall; Prebendary Gibbs (convener). 
 
 Local Taxation and Ratiiuj. — The Prolocutor; Dean of Lichfield; 
 Archdeacons Grant, Sanders, Lear, Bishop of Nottingham; Canons 
 Hopkins, Hinds Howell, Sumner; Prebendaries Edwards and 
 Gibbs (convener). 
 
 Home Reunion. — The Prolocutor; Deans of Lichfield and Bangor; 
 Archdeacons Hessey, Kaye, Earlc, Lear, Lewis, Walker, James; 
 Canons Argles, Miller, Puckle, Erskinc Clarke, Miles, Norris, 
 Bevan; Prebendaries Campion (convener), Edwards, Stephens; 
 Rev. P. C. Ellis; Sir J. E. Philipps. 
 
 Constitutions and Canons Ecclesiastical. — The Prolocutor; Deans of 
 Winchester (convener), Lichfield, and Lincoln ; Archdeacons Pott, 
 Fearon, Palmer, Grant, Chapman, Denison; Canons Bright, Lowe, 
 Swainson, Hopkins, Hinds Howell, Lloyd, Perry, Sumner; Preben- 
 dary Gibbs. 
 
 Intemperance. — The Prolocutor; Deans of Canterbury and West- 
 minster; Archdeacons Emery, Allen, Fearon, Sir G. Prevost, 
 Walker; Sub-Dean Clements; Canons Argles, Harvey, Wood, 
 Hopkins (convener) ; Prebendaries Dayman and Gibbs. 
 
 Primary Education. — The Prolocutor; Dean of Rochester; Arch- 
 deacons Bathnrst, Pott, Sir G. Prevost, Bishop of Nottingham, 
 Fearon, Randall (Bristol) ; Ady, Emery, Sanctuary, Allen, Chapman, 
 De Winton, Sanders, Maltby; Canons Hopkins, Lloyd, Gregory, 
 Barlow, Butler, Potter, Sumner, and Miles; Prebendaries Gibbs and 
 Campion ; Rev. W. Feetham. 
 
 Church and Diocesan Societies. — The Prolocutor; Archdeacons 
 Groomc, Hannah, Emery, Hobhouse, Randall (Buckingham), 
 Holbcch, lies, Randall (Bristol) ; Canons Butler (convener), 
 Stephens, Douglas, Sumner, Gregory; Prebendaries Edwards, 
 Ainslio, Gibbs, Kempe; Rev. W. Bree. 
 
 Diocesan Conferences. — The Prolocutor; Archdeacons Harrison, 
 Hessey (convener), Emery, Sanders, lies, Ffoulkes, Maltby, 
 Randall (Bristol), Perowne, Thicknesse, Ady, Lewis, Holbech, 
 Hannah, Sanctuary; Sub-Dean Clements; Canons Gregory, Raw- 
 linson, Puckle, Erskine Clarke, Sumner, Butler, Pownall, Douglas, 
 Neville; Prebendaries Salmon, Hockin, and Bevan; Rev. P. C 
 Ellis. 
 
42 LOWER HOUSE— June 1. {Address to 
 
 {f/ie Crown. 
 
 THE ADDRESS TO THE CKOWN. 
 
 The Prolocutor having read the Address (see report of Upper, 
 House, p. 2G), the House proceeded to discuss it clause by clause. 
 
 Canon Rawlixson, on the fourth paragraph, viz.: — 
 
 The result of their deliberations was, on the 15th day of August last, placed 
 m the hands of your Majesty's Principal Secretary of State- 
 said — I think those words are erroneous. There is no such person 
 as " her Majesty's Principal Secretary of State." There are several, 
 and they are all legally and exactly on a par. 
 
 Archdeacon Denison— I am sorry to differ from one who is 
 usually so accurate; but the head of the Home-office is the 
 Principal Secretary of State. Besides, there is no doubt the Royal 
 Letters of Business were communicated to Convocation through 
 the Home Secretary. 
 
 The Dean of Lincoln— I believe it is correct as it stands. 
 
 Canon Rawlinson — I have a son in the Home-office, and I have 
 heard him say that, when documents come addressed simply to the 
 Secretary of State, they often travel about from one to the other 
 before they reach the right hands. 
 
 The Prolocutor— We need pass no resolution upon it, but I will 
 mention that a doubt as to the correctness of the phrase has been 
 raised. 
 
 On paragraph 7: — 
 
 It is a great satisfac tion to us to know that in one of these dioceses— that of 
 Truro— his Koyal Highness the Prince of Wales was pleased to be present as 
 Duke of Cornwall, and personally to take a part in the foundation of a new 
 cathedral — 
 
 it was agreed by 33 to 10 to insert the word " graciously " before 
 " pleased." 
 
 The following passage was the subject of much discussion : — 
 We believe that the Church of England retains its hold on the affections of 
 nine-tenths of your Majesty's subjects; and while its usefulness is daily 
 increasing, it is spreading through all the dependencies of your Majesty's 
 empire, and has of late conciliated to itself in a remarkable degree the rctrard 
 of many other Christian Churches throughout the world. 
 
 Canon Butler— I should like to know what the last words, "tl,e 
 regard of many other Christian Churches throughout the world," 
 mean. It is indefinite, and I propose to alter it to " other branches 
 of Christ's Church." 
 
 The Prolocutor— Their lordships must have had something in 
 their minds to which they refer, but I cannot say what it is. 
 
 Archdeacon Harrison— I have heard that the Archbishop has 
 lately received some addresses from the Armenian and other 
 Churches in the East. The passage may have a reference to that 
 circumstance. It would certainly be better if the word " many " 
 were omitted. 
 
 Archdeacon Denison— They know in the other House what they 
 
Address to} LOWER HOUSE— June 1. 43 
 
 the Crown. ) 
 
 mean, but wo have no one to interpret that meaning for us. I 
 should be glad to know what Churches are referred to. 
 
 The Dean of Chichester — Por the sake of simplicity, I move the 
 omission of the word " Christian," as needless and tautological. 
 There arc other religious bodies, but there are no "Churches " which 
 are not Christian. 
 
 Sub-Dean Clements — I second that. 
 
 Auchdeacon Harrison — I do not see that the introduction of that 
 word excludes simplicity. It is, at any rate, a Scriptural expression. 
 There is a great deal said about the Churches of Christ in the 
 Epistles; for example, "The Churches of Asia salute you;" " tLe 
 Churches of Christ salute you;" " we have no such custom, neither 
 the Churches of God." Our Canons speak of the Churches of 
 England, Ireland, and Scotland; and they are also mentioned in the 
 Bidding Prayer. The phrase as it stands, then, is better than 
 speaking of branches of tho one Church of Christ. 
 
 Arcudicacon Palmer — I shall propose to withdraw the entire 
 clause. I have no information of many Churches in other parts of 
 the world having expressed admiration and regard for this Church 
 ol England, and I look upon it as a humiliating thing to boast of 
 such a circumstance, if it be the fact, at a juncture like this, 
 when there is an active body like the Liberation Society, and the 
 Church is now being dealt with by Parliament in a way which 
 does not show an overwhelming appreciation of her in our own 
 country. 
 
 Archdeacon Earle — I second the entire omission of the clause. 
 As there appear to be no authoritative grounds for the statement, 
 its insertion is, to say the least, unwise. 
 
 Sir P. Gore Ouselet — I must remind the House that tho 
 American Church has of late been drawn to us in a remarkable 
 manner, and the Archbishop may be alluding to the attendance of 
 the Bishops of other Churches at the Lambeth Palace Conferences. 
 
 Archdeacon Palmer — If the Archbishop intended to pay some 
 compliment to the American Bishops for their readiness to attend 
 the Conferences at Lambeth, I should have no objection ; but this 
 sentence is not calculated to convey any definite meaning of the 
 sort. It looks like a great puff for ourselves. In the first place, 
 I should like to have stronger evidence of the progress the Church 
 is making in the sympathy of foreign Churches; and secondly, if I 
 had it, I should not like to say anything about it. My motion is 
 to omit all the words after "empire." 
 
 Archdeacon Denison — Let us ask their lordships to say in so 
 many words what they mean. 
 
 Canon Gregory — I confess it does appear to me like blowing our 
 own trumpet, and that I do not think at all desirable. 
 
 The Dean of Chichester — Archdeacon Palmer has put the 
 matter in rather a painful light; but I cannot for a moment agree 
 
44 LOWER HOUSE— June 1. {AdJress to 
 
 \the Omm. 
 
 with him that the paragraph is mere fanfaronade. It really 
 expresses the yearning of the English Church for brotherly 
 sympathy, and her gratification at finding that sentiment returned. 
 I have seen a remarkable letter from the Armenian Patriarch to the 
 Archbishop, and the attitude of the American Church is equally 
 notable. If the words proposed to be omitted are left out, the 
 sentence will then become a singularly bald one; and, indeed, it will 
 require to be entirely recast. 
 
 Canon Rawunson — I think it will neither be courteous nor 
 Christianlike to omit this passage, which merely says that Convoca- 
 tion is alive to a desire for intercommunion and increased union 
 between the various branches of Christ's Church. Our spiritual 
 fathers seem to say to us a time has arrived when our sympathy 
 should be shown by some public act, and some distinct notice taken 
 of that desire for intercommunion. Their lordships seem to have 
 inserted the words in question to mark our appreciation of the way 
 in which foreign Churches have held out their hands to us and 
 shown their desire to embrace us as brethren ; and not only of 
 Churches which have sprung from our own, like that of America, 
 but also the Churches of the East — Abyssinian, Armenian, and 
 Greek. With regard to Cyprus, there is also to be noted that the 
 Church there have agreed to receive English Churchmen at the 
 Holy Communion. That is what we want. We cannot expect to 
 bring all our differences into agreement — that is not, perhaps, alto- 
 gether desirable — but those differences ought not to debar us from 
 communicating in one another's churches. I think that members of 
 the English Church should be received wherever in the world there 
 is a branch of Christ's Church, on bringing letters from their 
 Bishops, or other authority. That is the sort of union we want; 
 and of late years something has been done in that way. It would, 
 therefore, be an exceedingly ungracious thing both to those Churches 
 and to the Upper House entirely to ignore the subject. I earnestly 
 trust that the House will not take the advice of Archdeacon Palmer, 
 but sec that the time has come for us to act towards other Churches 
 iu a kind, gracious, and courteous way. 
 
 Archdeacon Sanctuary — I think that the former part of the para- 
 graph is as much a blowing of our trumpet as the latter; and it 
 would be desirable, therefore, to strike it out altogether. 
 
 Canon Yard — It is a matter of congratulation amongst ourselves 
 that the efforts which have been made in late years to bring the 
 Eastern Churches nearer to ourselves have to a certain extent been 
 crowned with success. They do feel sympathy « ith us, and we have 
 sympathy with them. As a recent instance I may mention that a 
 colonial Chaplain, who is building a church at Patras, has received 
 expressions of the warmest interest and sympathy from the 
 authorities of the Greek Church there. It is not then a blowing of 
 trumpets, but only a rejoicing that anything like union has been 
 accomplished. 
 
Address to \ LOWER HOUSE— Junk 1. 45 
 
 the Crown. ) 
 
 Tlio Rev. P. C. Ellis— I would express a hope that words will bo 
 
 inserted excluding the idea that what are sometimes called " our 
 dear Dissenting brethren " arc referred to. 
 
 The proposal to omit the passage was then negitived by 53 to 25. 
 
 The alteration suggested by Canon Butler, that of substituting 
 the words "other branches of Christ's Church" for the words 
 "other Christian Churches," was [agreed to, and the word "many" 
 was struck out. 
 
 Canon Wilkinson — I propose to omit the words " in a remarkable 
 degree." After listening to the debate, nothing seems to be more 
 patent than that the House is unwilling to use language with regard 
 to the Church of England which is exaggerated. 
 
 Archdeacon Denison — I second the motion. 
 
 On a show of hands it was negatived. 
 
 Archdeacon Earle — I think the phrase, "conciliated to herself," 
 is a very awkward one. It will hardly bear analysis. Could we not 
 say "gained to herself"? 
 
 The Prolocutor — It is not very good English, but it is quite as 
 good as " gained." 
 
 The amendment was not pressed, and the paragraph as amended 
 was agreed to. 
 
 Canon Gregory — I have placed on the table a rather long amend- 
 ment on the next paragraph, relating to reform of Convocation, and 
 as it is now five o'clock, and I shall have to address the House at 
 some length, I beg to move the adjournment of the debate. 
 
 Agreed to. 
 
 The Benediction was pronounced by the Archdeacon of Stow, 
 Bishop-Suffragan of Nottingham; and the PROLOCUTOR afterwards 
 stated that he had received the direction of his Grace the President 
 to continue and prorogue the present sitting of this Convocation to 
 and until the following day, Wednesday, the 2nd instant; and the 
 House was prorogued accordingly. 
 
16 
 
 UPPER HOUSE — June 2. [.The PrayarJwk 
 
 UPPER HOUSE. 
 
 Session IV. — Wednesday, June 2, 1880. 
 
 The House met at eleven o'clock. His Grace the ARCHBISHOP 
 presided. There were also present the Bishops of London, 
 Winchester, Llandaff, Norwich, Hereford, Bangor, St. Alhan's, 
 Salisbury, Lincoln, Bath and Wells, Oxford, Exeter,. St. Asaph, 
 Truro, Ely, Rochester, Chichester, and Lichfield. Prayers were 
 read. 
 
 PETITIONS. 
 
 By the Bishop of Salisbury — from the Clergy and Laity of 
 Salisbury, against any alteration in the Book of Common Prayer; 
 from the Archdeaconry of Saruin against the Burials Bill. 
 
 By the Bishop of Bath and Wells — from the Clergy of the 
 Rural Deanery of Axbridge, in favour of an extension of the number 
 of Proctors. 
 
 the prayer-book. 
 The President — 1 have received a letter from Colonel Hardy, who 
 says — " I am desired by Archdeacon Denison to send to your Grace 
 the accompanying declaration, signed by 50,000 persons, against 
 any alteration in the Prayer-book." The words of the form of 
 declaration arc as follows: — 
 
 form of Declaration (to be signed by men and women) to be presented to his 
 Grace the Archbishop of Canterbunj, Primate of All England. 
 
 We, tlio undersigned Clergy and Lay communicants of the Church of England, 
 do hereby subscribe our names to the three following resolutions, carried 
 unanimously at two meetings of Churchmen, held at Exeter Hall and St. 
 James's Hall, London, Thursday, November 13, 1879, and ordered to be 
 embodied in a declaration to be circulated for signature by Clergy and Lay 
 communicants throughout the country: — 
 
 " 1. That it is not expedient at the present time to alter the Prayer-book. 
 
 " 2. That if at any future time such alteration be contemplated, the Lower 
 Houses of the Convocations of Canterbury and York require first to be made 
 adequate representatives of the Clergy of the two provinces. 
 
 " 3. That, without pronouncing any opinion upon the Bill commonly known 
 as the ' Bishop of Carlisle's Bill,' intituled ' An Act to provide facilities for 
 the Amendment from time to time of the Bites and Ceremonies of the Church 
 of England,' yet, inasmuch as it contemplates legislation at this time upon 
 concurrent advice of Convocations as now constituted, this meeting cannot 
 approve of the said Bill." 
 
 Your lordships will perceive there is some little difficulty with regard 
 to this matter, because it is not actually a petition to Convocation, 
 but a form of declaration, and it is submitted to me in a private 
 
Education <nl UPPER HOUSE— June 2. 47 
 
 the East, j 
 
 letter, with a request that I will communicate it to Convocation. I 
 see no reason for not complying with that request, and, therefore, I 
 will present it to your lordships. It seems to me to be a protest 
 against what was done by Convocation at its last sittings. 
 
 EDUCATION IN THE EAST. 
 
 The President — In a few words which I addressed to the Lower 
 House, I mentioned that various bodies had communicated with me 
 on the subject of the extension of schools and the better education of 
 the Clergy in the East. I now wish to recall your lordships' atten- 
 tion to the discussion which took place at the last group of Sessions 
 respecting Christians dwelling on the confines of Persia and Armenia, 
 who, for a long time, have been urging on the authorities of the 
 Church of England the desirability of sending to them certain 
 persons to enable them to form schools and conduct the education of 
 their Clergy in a more satisfactory manner. Very great difficulties 
 have stood in the way of such a movement. Some years ago a 
 Clergyman in London (Mr. Cutts) was deputed to visit those 
 countries, and he made a very interesting report on the subject. 
 His presence there was hailed by the Patriarch and the whole of the 
 Bishops and Clergy who could be got together, and great expecta- 
 tions were formed that we should be able to do something satisfac- 
 tory in assisting them in their laudable effort to improve the schools, 
 and assist in improving the education of the Clergy. Difficulties 
 have arisen partly from the disturbed state of the country and 
 partly from the difficulty of providing large funds for the purpose 
 of carrying the objects to a satisfactory solution. Two great 
 societies — that for the Propagation of the Gospel in Foreign Parts 
 and the Christian Knowledge Society — granted certain sums of 
 money, to be placed at the disposal of the two Archbishops, and 
 various names of persons who were ready to go out have been men- 
 tioned. We wrote to the Professors of the two great Universities 
 and other authorities, requesting them to submit to us the names of 
 persons who were suitable for the object. Unfortunately, one of 
 those gentlemen who were named is too ill to be able to go. The other 
 is able to go, and we hope to obtain the name of another very 
 speedily. The state of the country is not satisfactory, but, from the 
 assurance of the authorities, we are satisfied that there is no such 
 danger to Englishmen travelling there as that to which the natives 
 are exposed. I have also reason to believe that such a movement 
 will not be looked upon in any unkind light by the American mis- 
 sionaries who have long laboured there. All persons acquainted 
 with the feelings of the Christians living in these parts state that, 
 although the American missionaries have done a great deal of good, 
 and have gathered a considerable number of persons together, they 
 are not likely to make any great progress with the mass of 
 Christians connected with those Churches, because the persons fre- 
 quenting them are naturally deeply attached to the forms of Chris- 
 tianity which have prevailed in the Christian Church from the 
 
48 
 
 UPPER HOUSE— JUNK 2. [Visitation Fees. 
 
 earliest times, and which do not prevail amongst the body who 
 send forth the American missionaries. The grc.it hindrance in the 
 way of a more enlightened Christianity is the fact that no effort of a 
 long-continued kind has been made in their favour, except by those 
 persons who have been sent from America and who belong to what 
 may be called the Independent body. Letters which I have received 
 from the Patriarch and other persons who are interested in the state 
 of the country leave rnc very little doubt that any persons who may 
 be sent out would be very welcome, and that a groat field of labour, 
 which is likely to yield an abundant harvest, would be open to them. 
 I have called your lordships' attention to this matter in order that 
 your lordships may take the opportunity of pointing out to mc or 
 to the Archbishop of York any gentleman who may possess the 
 requisite qualifications, and who may be able to join with the 
 gentleman now ready to go out. I believe that a knowledge of the 
 Oriental languages is not an indispensable qualification, and I hope 
 your lordships may be able to assist me in my efforts to find out 
 suitable men for the purposes 1 have mentioned. 
 
 VISITATION FEES. 
 
 The Bishop of Oxford — I wish to say a few words respecting 
 the fees payable at Visitations. This subject causes considerable 
 anxiety in many dioceses, from the unwillingness on the part of 
 churchwardens to pay them, and also from questions arising as to 
 the funds out of which the cost of them should be defrayed. It is 
 said that since the abolition of compulsory Church-rates there has 
 been no fund out of which such fees could be paid. Consequently 
 there is a growing unwillingness to pay them, and that unwillingness 
 has increased since the Table of Fees was altered by the Arch- 
 bishops of Canterbury and York and the Lord Chancellor, under 
 the Acts of Parliament in that behalf. The effect of what was done 
 by them was actually to raise the amount beyond what had been 
 previously paid. In other dioceses it left the amount as it was, 
 and in some it reduced it; but the whole result is that there is a 
 great deal of uneasiness, and that the work of Visitation is consider- 
 ably impeded by the continual annoyance expressed by the church- 
 wardens who refuse to pay the fees, and who yet claim to be 
 admitted to their office. Very often there is a kind of remonstrance 
 on the part of the Ordinary with the parochial officers on the 
 subject. Frequently there is an "ignorant impatience" of that 
 kind of taxation, and it interferes a good deal with the usefulness 
 of Visitations. The question I wish to ask~your Grace is whether 
 your Grace and the Archbishop of York and the Lord Chancellor 
 are ready to exercise the powers conferred upon you by the statute, 
 and to consider the Table of Fees, so as to bring it down to the 
 sum paid in those dioceses where the fees were at the lowest, so that 
 none shall have cause to complain that the action under the new 
 law has been, in fact, to raise the fees. I will also venture to 
 express a hope that the Archbishops and the Lord Chancellor will 
 
Visitation Fees.] 
 
 UPPER HOUSE— Junk 2. 
 
 49 
 
 go further than that, and bring down the fees to the lowest point 
 possible. If the present state of things goes on, I am afraid that 
 year after year more parishes may decline to pay, and that the fees 
 may ultimately disappear in that way, except in the few cases 
 where there is a fund out of which you cati compel them to pay 
 their fees. 
 
 The President — Your lordships will remember that this and 
 kindred matters formed the subject of discussion in a Select 
 Committee of the House of Lords some few years ago, and that a 
 Bill was prepared which many of us have good reasons to remember. 
 The circumstances connected with the payment of the very large 
 expenses which that Bill caused have probably impressed it 
 upon our memory. Besides that there have been various 
 private discussions among your lordships on the subject, and I 
 think the result of the whole of these discussions and of the 
 abortive attempt at legislation has been that the two Archbishops 
 and the Lord Chancellor are expected to remodel the whole Table 
 of Fees according to the powers vested in them by existing Acts of 
 Parliament. I uudertook to communicate with the Lord Chancellor 
 and the Archbishop of York with a view of having that speedily 
 done. I did communicate with the late Lord Chancellor, and I was 
 in hopes that we might set to work to remodel these fees. But the 
 Lord Chancellor with whom I communicated has ceased to hold the 
 Great Seal, and, therefore, the arrangements have to be begun de 
 novo with his successor. Of course, a Lord Chancellor entering 
 an his office has a great deal of other business to transact, and I 
 have not thought it wise yet to approach the present Lord Chan- 
 cellor on the subject; but I am ready to do so with the least 
 possible delay, and to have this matter thoroughly taken in hand. 
 I agree with the Bishop of Oxford that it is very desirable that 
 in authoritative statement of what ought to be paid should be put 
 forth, and that that authoritative statement, founded on the Act of 
 Parliament, should be considered to be as legal an impost as any 
 other impost which any of her Majesty's subjects are called upon to 
 pay. In the meantime vai-ious arrangements have been made in 
 dioceses to diminish the pressure of the existing fees by arrange- 
 ment, and in my own diocese, for example, and, I believe, in many 
 others, the fees for consecration have been greatly diminished by 
 agreement with the officers who are connected with consecrations. 
 Still, that is not a legal settlement of the matter, but merely an 
 agreement which is found to work well while the proper legislative 
 proceeding has been in abeyance. Not only the fees for consecra- 
 tions, but other fees have by arrangement been modified. With 
 regard to the Visitation fee, for example, the practice is, in my 
 diocese, to take 10s. instead of 18s., which is a considerable abate- 
 ment. The former sum is cheerfully paid, or, at all events, it is 
 paid, whether cheerfully or not. 
 
 The Bishop of Oxford — Some refuse to pay under arrangement. 
 They want to know what the law is. 
 
 £ 
 
50 
 
 UPPER HOUSE — June 2. 
 
 [Visitation Fees. 
 
 The President— Then, if fclicy pay anything, they ought to pay the 
 18s. The Archdeacons in my diocese have this year, in which my 
 own Visitation takes place, sworn in the churchwardens, and all fees 
 were remitted on that occasion. But these, after all, are merely 
 temporary arrangements, and it is very desirable that the statutable 
 and legal mode of settling this difficulty should be put in operation 
 as soon as possible. I will lose no time in communicating with the 
 Lord Chancellor and the Archbishop of York for that purpose. 
 
 The Bishop of Llandaff— To what fees does the power extend? 
 
 The President— Without referring to the documents I cannot 
 exactly say how far our power extends ; but it is very considerable, 
 and applies to a much larger number of fees than it did originally. 
 The Second Act extended our functions. 
 
 The Bishop of Llandaff — Is there any source from which the 
 money can come to pay these fees? 
 
 The President— I think the Committee of the House of Lords 
 thought that whatever fees were available for keeping the church 
 in repair, and so forth, were available for the payment of these fees. 
 It is a common notion that these fees are paid for no advantage 
 whatever; but I believe that to be a most erroneous notion. The 
 lay officers of the Church have really very important functions to 
 perform, and no one can expect that they would perform those 
 functions without being remunerated for them. Few people consider 
 what a serious thing it would be if there were no such thing as 
 a Registry in a diocese. How, for example, could a man prove 
 in a court of justice that he had been ordained? He might have 
 lost his letters of orders, and in the absence of a Registry there 
 would be no possibility of legally proving that he was ordained. 
 Again, how could he prove that he had been legally instituted 
 to a living, unless there was a registration of all these acts? It 
 is ridiculous to expect that legal gentlemen will keep these 
 registers simply for the love of keeping them, or out of extreme 
 benevolence for the Clergy. They must be remunerated, and I 
 have long thought that, upon the whole, the fees which are 
 charged, while they are so much complained of, are probably less 
 than they would be if the bill of the legal gentleman were in each 
 case sent in for the work he had performed. Therefore, I wish it 
 to be understood, first, that I do not consider these payments to be 
 in themselves exorbitant; and, secondly, that it is absolutely 
 necessary that this work should be done, and if done that the 
 persons who do it should be remunerated. At the same time, it is, 
 of course, most desirable that the fees should be regulated according 
 to some proper standard, and Parliament has already pointed out 
 the officers who are from time to time to revise the scale of fees and 
 to settle them for the future. Those officers — viz., the two Arch- 
 bishops and the Lord Chancellor — are, I have reason to believe, 
 quite ready to do their duty as soon as opportunity occurs. 
 
 The Bishop of Llandaff— Another matter causes great trouble 
 
Visitation Fees.'] 
 
 UPPER HOUSE— June 2. 
 
 51 
 
 to Registrars and official persons in respect of which there is no 
 remuneration at all. A member of the House of Commons moves 
 for a return from all the dioceses in the kingdom, and there comes 
 a direction from the Secrotai'y of State to collect the materials for 
 such return. There is nobody to do the work, which is often very 
 laborious, except our poor Registrars, and 1 certainly think they 
 ought to have some i-emuneration for their trouble. 
 
 The Bisnop of London — It is unfortunate that the payment of 
 many of our officers appears to be made for one thing, whereas it 
 really goes for another. The Chancellor attends a Visitation and 
 receives his fee. Very frequently he does not do much thei'e. In 
 many cases, indeed, he merely sits by the side of the Bishop while 
 the forms are gone through, and the churchwardens complain that 
 there is a large payment for vei - y little duty. As a matter of fact 
 I have had three Chancellors since I have been a Bishop, and every 
 one of them has always been ready to answer any legal questions I 
 put to him on behalf of the Clergy or churchwardens in the dioceso 
 without making any charge. It is their duty to advise me, but not 
 to advise the churchwardens and Clergy of the diocese; and all this 
 was, therefore, done voluntarily on their part. I have often thought 
 that if the fees which would otherwise have to be paid in con- 
 sulting counsel in these cases were put together annually, they 
 would amount to considerably more than the Chancellor of the 
 diocese receives in fees from all sources. If this only could appear 
 it would be seen that, instead of being overpaid, the Chancellors 
 receive less than they would do if they were practising as 
 ecclesiastical lawyers and were consulted on these occasions. The 
 Clergy and churchwardens get their opinions almost for nothing. 
 
 The Bishop of Winchester — I agree with the Bishop of London 
 that the Clergy and churchwardens get a great deal of work done 
 for them in consequence of our Church officers. There is one class 
 of fees in which I take great interest — namely, fees for Faculties. In 
 many cases a private arrangement has been made, but I find there is 
 an objection sometimes to enter into such ai'rangements. I do not 
 think these fees for Faculties are too large considering the amount 
 of work which the Chancellor and the Registrar do, but at the same 
 time I believe a great many more fees for Faculties would be 
 obtained if the fees were smaller. At present the Clergy and church- 
 wardens take the greatest pains to evade Faculties, and will never 
 have one if they can possibly help it. Where only a small alteration 
 is made the Bishop does not like to enforce a Faculty when the fees 
 are heavy. If, however, the fees were moderate, one would wish to 
 enforce a Faculty for every small matter. It seems to me to be of 
 great consequence that the Clergy and churchwardens should not do 
 what they please without a Faculty. Mischievous things are some- 
 times done by people taking matters into their own hands; but if the 
 fees were lower they would often apply for a Faculty in cases where 
 at present they do not think of doing so. I believe that in the 
 diocese of London the fees have been diminished by arrangement. 
 
 E 2 
 
52 
 
 UPPER HOUSE — Jonjs 2. [Fwitattoa feet. 
 
 The Bishop of London — Yes; and the consequence is that few 
 alterations are made without Faculties. 
 
 The Bishop of Lincoln — In consequence of the abatement made 
 in your Grace's diocese, we also made a considerable abatement with 
 the consent of the Registrar and the Chancellor; and now a Faculty 
 is required in every case. No objection is made. 
 
 The Bishop of ROCHESTER — What is the amount of the fee? 
 
 The Bishop of Lincoln — I think it is about 21. 10s. The fact is 
 that when it becomes very reasonable there is scarcely any scruple 
 as to the payment of it. There is one other abatement, which, with 
 the consent of my Chancellor, Dr. Walter Phillimorc, has been 
 made, and which is working admirably well. That is with regard 
 to the fees on letters of sequestration. When a vacancy occurs we 
 issue letters of sequestration, for there is no legal protection to the 
 churchwardens or to the incoming Incumbent as to the remunera- 
 tion of the Clergyman who does duty during a vacancy. This some- 
 times produces very considerable embarrassment. Perhaps the 
 churchwardens may have been too liberal, and the Incumbent finds 
 that a considerable sum to which he is entitled has been wasted 
 before he comes to the living. If, however, a letter of sequestration 
 is issued, there is a special fee fixed by Act of Parliament. 
 
 The Bishop of Exeter — Yes; but it is very low. 
 
 The Bishop of Lincoln — Still, it can be applied to the discharge 
 of the duty. It is, at any rate, something known to the law. That 
 is an immense advantage; so that there is no difficulty whatsoever. 
 You bring the matter under the operation of the law, and then it in 
 clearly defined. This, however, is a point which is not quite 
 germane to the present question. With regard to this question of 
 fees, I may observe that there has been a remission of fees entirely 
 as to the matter of procurations. I believe there is no diocese in 
 which fees for procurations are now paid. It ought to be known 
 to the public that the Bishops receive no fees whatever. There is 
 no such thing as a fee, 1 believe, now paid to a Bishop for anything. 
 That ought to be known throughout the country. I know of no 
 fee whatever that comes into Episcopal hands at present. Pro- 
 curations have disappeared now, and I hope it may be reported 
 from this House to the world that there is no such thing as a fee 
 paid to a Bishop for the discharge of any Episcopal duties. 
 
 The Bishop of Lichfield — In a former meeting there was a 
 Table of Fees — an ad valorem scale connected specially with 
 institution to benefices; and when it was brought before the House 
 some of the Welsh Bishops, particularly the Bishop of Llandaff, 
 objected to it because it would reduce the fees of his officials to 
 such a low point, in consequence of the smallness of the livings, 
 that it would be impossible to get officials to discharge the duties. 
 From that time to this, I do not know what has become of that 
 Table of Fees; but it is certainly desirable that the question should 
 be settled in some way. 
 
Visitation Fees.] UPPER HOUSE — JUNE 2. 
 
 53 
 
 The President — I presume these fees are included in the fees to 
 be settled by the two Archbishops and the Lord Chancellor. They 
 are all capable of being revised by them. I suppose this table was 
 submitted merely in order to get the opinions of the Bishops 
 upon it. 
 
 The Bishop of Lichfibld — I believe a communication was made 
 with the different dioceses. 
 
 The President — It was; in order that we might know what 
 would be agreeable to them. But the matter has to be settled by 
 these authorities to whom I have just referred. 
 
 The Bishop of Bath and Wells — If the Bishops do not now 
 receive fees, they have heavy fees to pay when they are admitted to 
 their sees. 
 
 The President — I have to pay, I think, 280/. a year to Queen 
 Anne's Bounty. 
 
 The Bishop of Oxford — As a strong statement has been made 
 that the Bishops receive no fees, it must not, therefore, be inferred 
 that they pay none. 
 
 The Bishop of Bath and Wells — The cruellest thing is the 
 enormous fees paid by Bishops who go to the Law Officers of the 
 Crown. 
 
 The President — They are somewhat reduced now — I mean the 
 fees on a Bishop's consecration. There was a fee when I was con- 
 secrated part of which went to the " Petty Bag " — an inappropriate 
 name, I think. Certainly the fees are still large; but they were 
 much larger a few years ago. I do not know all the particulars 
 of the process by which they were reduced, but it appears that 
 the homnge fee has been reduced from to 211. 
 
 The Bishop of London — There used to be a fee of homage paid 
 to almost all the servants in the Royal household, down to the 
 servants in the kitchen. The Queen on her accession had her 
 attention called to that, and directed that the servants should not 
 receive it any longer. 
 
 The Bishop of Oxford — If every payment is going to be scra- 
 tinised, I would call attention to the expense of making returns 
 every year to the Barons of the Exchequer of all institutions and 
 other things on large pieces of parchment. There are, I believe, 
 no Barons of the Exchequer now, and the return is a useless relic 
 of old times; but we have to pay a good many pounds for it. 
 
 The Bishop of Lincoln — One class of persons appear to bo 
 entitled to some consideration — namely, the Honorary Canons. 
 They hare be«n stripped of their revenues, yet when admitted they 
 now pay between 71. and 81. 
 
 The Bishop of Salisbury — And in some dioceses more. I myself 
 had occasion to pay for one a year or two ago. 
 
 The Bishop of London — But these are not fees which come under 
 the supervision of the Lord Chancellor and the Archbishops. 
 
54 
 
 UPPER HOUSE— JUNE 2. ( Lay.deacont and 
 \ Lay-readers. 
 
 The Bishop of Oxford — The fees for institution do. 
 
 The President — I am informed by my secretary that the fee for 
 an Honorary Canon paid to him is 11. 
 
 The Bishop of Rochester — I paid 121. at York for a canonry. 
 
 The President — I hope and believe things are changed for the 
 better since the time when Bishop Blomfield, according to the story, 
 offered an hou. canonry to a Clergyman, who declined it, being too 
 poor to pay the fees. The Bishop arranged that his officers should 
 take no fees in that case, but the Cauon soon found he had passed 
 from the hands of the Bishop's officers into the hands of the officers 
 of the Chapter. He then said, " I am sure there must be some 
 fees here," and he was informed what they were. Thereupon he 
 said, "I will not go any further." The reply was — "There is no 
 use in your stopping here, as it will cost you a great deal more to 
 resign. You had better go on." 
 
 lay-deacons and lat-readers. 
 
 The Bishop of Lichfield — I wish to ask whether there is any 
 Committee now in existence for considering the relations between. 
 Bishops and their Lay-readers and Lay-deacons, and whether such 
 Committee has ever made any Report? 
 
 The Bishop of London — The regulations respecting Lay-readers 
 on which we act were drawn up at a meeting of Bishops held at 
 Lambeth some years ago. The meeting was held on Ascension 
 Day, at Lambeth, in Archbishop Longley's time, but I cannot give 
 the exact date. I do not remember any such Committee of Con- 
 vocation. We have acted on these regulations. 
 
 The President — There was no Committee on the subject during 
 the last Convocation. 
 
 The Bishop of Lichfield — I should like to move that such 
 a Committee be appointed. I find that the use varies very much 
 in different dioceses, and the number of Lay Readers and Deacons 
 employed is becoming increasingly great, while the duties intrusted 
 to them are also more important than before; and I conclude that 
 it is desirable that there should be some understanding among the 
 Bishops as to the terms on which these Lay-readers should bo 
 appointed, and the functions which should be intrusted to them. 
 In my own diocese I found an arrangement existing that an 
 Incumbent should nominate his Lay-reader, and that the Bishop 
 should give him his licence, throwing the whole responsibility on 
 the Incumbent, and taking no responsibility on himself. It seems 
 scarcely desirable that there should be such a state of things, when 
 a Lay-deacon can hold services in Mission-rooms and preach under 
 certain circumstances. I think it would be well to have some 
 security as to fitness for so important an office. 
 
 The President — Do you think he ought to be examined? 
 
Lay.deaconsandl UPPER HOUSE— JUNE 2. 55 
 
 Lay -readers, j 
 
 Tho Bishop of Lichfield — I think there should be some 
 testimony as to his qualifications. 
 
 The Bishop of Oxford — There is always an examination. 
 
 The Bishop of Lichfield — The practice is not so uniform as 
 the Bishop of London seems to think. It is desirable that some 
 inquiry should be made as to the form of licence issued by diffei - ent 
 Bishops, with a view of arriving at some uniform method of 
 proceeding in the matter. 
 
 The President — Do you say you examine the Lay-readers? 
 
 The Bishop of Oxford — Always. 
 
 The President — Are there any other dioceses in which they are 
 examined besides those of Oxford and St. Alban's. 
 
 The Bishop of Llandaff — My rule has been never to accept 
 anybody till he has been made the subject of inquiries by the 
 Archdeacons, and till they have recommended him to me as a fit 
 person for appointment. 
 
 The President — I suppose the usual custom is that prevailing in 
 my diocese — namely, that the Reader is recommended by tho Clergy- 
 man of the parish, who makes himself responsible for his fitness, 
 and that then he is accepted by the Bishop. 
 
 The Bishop of Oxford — But in some cases the Clergyman does 
 not at all know his fitness in point of knowledge, though ho may 
 be satisfied as to his character. 
 
 The Bishop of Winchester — I think it would be very difficult to 
 have a general system. I admitted a General Officer as a Reader. I 
 was satisfied that he was a very good man. I knew him personally, 
 but I could not have subjected him to an examination. I think, on 
 the whole, the best thing is to trust tho Clergyman of the parish. 
 He would not get a man who he did not know would be useful in 
 tho parish. If you can trust the Clergyman you can also trust to 
 his recommendation. You can always withdraw the licence if 
 necessary. A Lay-reader has no order iu the Church, but is merely 
 a layman who is employed by the Clergyman to do spiritual work. 
 
 The Bishop of Oxford — Surely the licence means something. 
 
 The Bishop of Winchester — It means that on the whole you are 
 satisfied he is a fit person. If I trusted a Clergyman, and he 
 nominated to me a pious and intelligent layman in his parish to do 
 work of this kind I should not have any particular objection to 
 admitting him, knowing as I do that I can withdraw his licence at 
 any moment. We want as much as possible to extend this system 
 of lay work under the immediate direction of the pastor of the 
 parish and the Bishop of the diocese. If you put too many 
 restrictions on the appointment of Lay-readers the supply would 
 probably become very small. 1 have never in my experience been 
 disappointed in any single case. I never found anything going 
 wrong. 
 
 The Bishop of London — I always cause confidential inquiries to 
 
56 UPPER HOUSE— JUNE 2. t Lay-deacons and 
 
 X Lay -readers. 
 
 be made, but I am not in the habit of examining Lay-readers. I can 
 quite confirm the experience of the Bishop of Winchester. Only 
 in two cases have I had any reason to regret the appointment of a 
 Header. 
 
 The Bishop of Bath and Wells — I thought the responsibility 
 rested on the Clergyman. It is only a temporary office, and I 
 always, in giving a licence, limit it to such time as the Clergyman 
 thinks fit to continue the Reader's services. 
 
 The Bishop of Llandaff — I have found it desirable to have 
 some officer intermediate between myself and the Incumbent, for 
 an Incumbent may recommend some zealous person to me whom it 
 would be very undesirable to appoint. I therefore cause inquiries 
 to be made through the agency of the Archdeacons. I agree with 
 the Bishop of Winchester that it would be undesirable to have 
 anything like an examination. In my own diocese there is a parish 
 containing a great many seamen, and I there licensed a gentleman 
 who was a naval captain to be a Lay-reader. 
 
 The President — I think an examination would very much 
 diminish the number of applications. 
 
 The Bishop of Oxford — In agricultural dioceses the persons 
 who apply have in some instances no acquaintance with the Bible, 
 and it is undesirable that such persons should receive a formal 
 licence from the Bishop. Even a General Officer might be asked to 
 write a short sermon or something of that kind. If he took offence 
 at that he would be hardly a man to be placed in such a position. 
 
 The Bishop of Lichfield — I see great force in what has been 
 stated by the Bishop of Winchester, but many of these gentlemen 
 hold services in outlying hamlets Sunday after Sunday, and we 
 ought, therefore, to ascertain whether the instruction they impart 
 is sound and good. If it is thought desirable to have a Committee 
 to consider the terms of the licences to and the functions of these 
 Lay-readers or Lay-deacons I shall be prepared to submit some 
 names. 
 
 The President — You now raise a new question about the 
 functions of the Readers. These functions have been mentioned at 
 several of our meetings, and there has always been great dimculty 
 in defining what Lay-readers may do. The form of licence in my 
 diocese is to the effect that they may perform such functions as may 
 be performed by laymen, thus leaving the Clergyman of the parish 
 to explain to him what those functions are. 
 
 The Bishop of Lichfield — The question of principle is an 
 important one. 
 
 The President — Yes; but it is one of those questions which it is 
 difficult accurately to decide. 
 
 The Bishop of Lichfield — I am speaking of persons ministering 
 in outlying hamlets where there are Mission churches. 
 
 The Bishop of Winchester — We agreed at the Lambeth 
 
Petitions.'] 
 
 LOWER HOUSE— June 2. 
 
 57 
 
 meeting not to give them any authority officially in churches beyond 
 reading the Lessons and conducting in outlying hamlets a service 
 such as might be appointed, excluding of course all parts appro- 
 priated to ordained Priests. I believe in some cases they were to 
 be allowed to preach a printed sermon. 
 
 The Bishop of Chichester — If we could get anything like a 
 uniform rule for these most useful officers of our Church, perhaps 
 the Bishops themselves would be very great gainers. 
 
 The Bishop of Lincoln — The suggestions made to the Committee 
 by the different dioceses would be vei'y useful. If we could have 
 them all contributed to one receptacle such as the Report of this 
 Committee we might derive great advantage therefrom. I should 
 like to know tho practice of different dioceses as to the dress of 
 these Readers. In my own they wear a surplice. 
 
 The Bishop of Oxford — I think they do in my diocese also. The 
 more uniformity we have in our respective dioceses tho better. 
 
 The motion was agreed to; and 
 
 The Bishop of Lichfield nominated the Committee as follows: — 
 The Bishop of Oxford, tho Bishop of St. Alban's, the Bishop of 
 Chichester, the Bishop of Lincoln, and the Bishop of Lichfield. 
 
 The schedule of prorogation was then read, by which the sitting 
 was prorogued to the following day. 
 
 LOWER HOUSE. 
 
 Prayers were said by the Very Rev. Lord Alwtne Compton, 
 Dean of Worcester, Prolocutor; the Prooconizatiou of members was 
 made by Mr. F. Cobb, the Actuary ; and the Minutes of the previous 
 Session were confirmed and ordered to be reduced to Acts, 
 according to the ancient practice of Convocation. 
 
 The Prolocutor named as his Assessors for the present Session 
 the Deans of St. Paul's and Winchester; the Provost of Eton; the 
 Archdeacons of Maidstone, Middlesex, Chichester, and Lincoln; 
 Canons Rawlinson, Swainson, Sumner, Barlow, and Yard. 
 
 petitions. 
 
 By Canon Pownall — (1) Signed by the Rural Dean and 
 fourteen of the Clergy of Guthlaxton (second portion) ; (2) by 
 eleven of the Clergy of the Rural Deanery of Weedon; (3) by ten 
 of the Clergy of the Rural Deanery of Higham-Ferrers (third 
 portion), diocese Peterborough — in favour of an increase in the 
 number of Proctors elected for the Clergy. 
 
58 LOWER HOUSE— June 2. f Reform of 
 
 ( Convocation. 
 
 By Canon Yard— Signed by eleven of the Clergy of the Rural 
 Deanery of Framland (second portion), diocese Peterborough — in 
 favour of an increase in the number of Proctors elected for the 
 Clergy. 
 
 By Canon Butler — Signed by one layman, diocese Oxford, 
 against the continued recital of the Athanasian Creed in the Church 
 services. 
 
 NOTICES OF MOTION. 
 
 Prebendary Kempe— That it be referred to the Committee of 
 Privileges to consider in what way a more respectful recognition of 
 the Chair in all the proceedings of this House may be secured. 
 
 Canon Hinds Howell, on behalf of Archdeacon Neyill 
 (Norfolk) — That it be referred to the Committee on Occasional 
 Services to prepare a form of service for public and private use 
 • during the dissolution of Parliament. 
 
 reform of convocation. 
 
 The House then took into consideration the remaining clause of 
 the proposed Address to the Crown. 
 
 Canon Gregory, who had given previous notice, proposed, instead 
 of paragraph 9, viz. : — 
 
 " It has been represented to us that our Convocation might better discharge 
 its duties if some addition were made to its number of Proctors iu the Lower 
 House, and we desire to bring this subject under the consideration of your 
 Majesty " — ■ 
 
 to insert the following: — 
 
 "We would venture to represent to your Majesty that, owing to changes 
 inevitable from the lapse of time and alteration of circumstances, the repre- 
 sentation of the Clergy in the Lower House is not so complete as it is desirable 
 that it should be. Of the 155 members of whom it consists only fortv-six are 
 chosen by the parochial Clergy, and of these some are selected by the Bishop 
 of the diocese or otherwise out of a larger number elected by the Clergy. Of 
 the others, eighty-six are eic officio members, and are nominated by your 
 Majesty or by individual Bishops ; the remaining twenty-three are elected by 
 Cathedral Chapters. 
 
 " We therefore humbly pray your Majesty to issue Letters of Business, 
 directing Convocation to prepare the draft of a Canon, which, if your Majesty 
 shall see fit to issue your Koyal Licence to that effect, the Convocation may 
 enact, by which a more complete representation of the parochial Clergy in 
 Convocation may be secured. We are aware there is no precedent for such a 
 course, but neither was there a precedent for the Civil Legislature dealing 
 with the representation of the people in the House of Commons until the 
 Reform Bill of 1832. We believe that the arguments which were held to 
 justify the course then taken are equally applicable to the course which we 
 now venture to propose. 
 
 " In humbly presenting the request that your Majesty would be graciously 
 pleased to issue Letters of Business of the purport already described, we seek 
 no new power for Convocation, no change in the principle of its constitution, 
 and no exclusion of nominated members. All that we ask is that the voice of 
 the whole Clergy of the province of Canterbury may be more directly uttered 
 in their Convocation, that so important interests may not suffer from the 
 Clergy being restricted in providing representatives to meet and discuss what 
 would most tend to the peace and edification of the Church in this country." 
 
Reform of \ 
 Convocation. ) 
 
 LOWER HOUSE— June 2. 
 
 59 
 
 The rev. Canon said — The words of the Address sent down by the 
 Upper House ought on this subject at least to have a more definite 
 form, and state distinctly the way in which the reforms we desire 
 to see effected might bo accomplished. There are two ways in 
 which this might be done. That which always found most favour 
 in this House was to make the change by the sole power and 
 authority of the President. There are, however, as we probably all 
 know, difficulties in the way which render that course impracticable. 
 It has been stated by men learned in the law, and occupying high 
 positions in the State, that if the representation were reformed as 
 thus proposed, the House would not be recognised as the Con- 
 vocation of Canterbury. That being so, the authoritative exercise 
 of the President's power in this matter would only launch us upon 
 a* sea of difficulties. Convocation would then lose all its prestige, 
 debates would arise as to what was Convocation, confusion must 
 ensue, and the whole proceeding would be most unwise, and 
 its results disastrous. The course now proposed will obtain further 
 sanction, if we look at the histoi-y of Convocation from the earliest 
 times. There are no traces of how Priests were summoned to 
 consult with the Bishops on matters of importance to the Church 
 until the reign of Henry III., and it was not until that of Edward I. 
 that Convocation was formally summoned in a manner at all 
 resembling that which now prevails. In days when all authority 
 in civil matters emanated from the Crown, the Sovereign exercised 
 supreme control over summoning the lay House of Parliament, and 
 in the same way, no doubt, the Archbishop of Canterbury exercised 
 a similar power as to calling together the Lower House of Convo- 
 cation. Some years ago, when the question of reforming the House 
 of Commons was under consideration, it was contended by some 
 that that House was not competent to reform itself, and that the 
 true line of action would be by an act of the Crown. It is needless 
 to say that this ai-gument was summarily set aside and Parliament 
 passed the Reform Bill. That is to say, just such an act as it is 
 proposed should be exercised by the Archbishop was not exercised 
 by the Crown, but by Parliament, and so analogy requires that if 
 the Lower House of Canterbury is to be reformed it must be by a 
 Canon and not by the authority of its President. Every age must 
 be governed by the public opinion of the age, and that is an 
 additional reason for the course proposed, as it is now considered 
 that the only practical mode of action is legislation. It is true that 
 a great reform has been effected in the Province of York by the 
 Archbishop's own authority, but that was done at a time when 
 people took little notice of what Convocation was or what it did, as 
 it had been dormant for many years. There happened to be a 
 gentleman near the Archbishop of York who was well versed in 
 the history of Convocation and of what was needed to secure 
 an adequate representation of the Clergy, and he suggested 
 to his Grace that which had a basis of authority. His Grace 
 wisely acted upon the suggestion; the Convocation of York has 
 
60 LOWER HOUSE— June 2. ( Reform of 
 
 \ Convocation. 
 
 since been recognised by official documents and acts of the Crown, 
 and so the change was in that way practically completed. That' 
 however, was not done in Canterbury; its Lower House was 
 summoned as in previous times; and now, for the reasons I have 
 given, it would be impossible to reform it in that way. What, then, 
 is to be done? I need not refer to the numerous meetings held 
 all over the province, or the petitions which in various forms and 
 ways have for years been presented to both Houses, in increasing 
 numbers and in a weightier manner, as evidences of the fact thai 
 there is a general feeling that something must be done. The 
 amendment I propose suggests that a Canon should be passed by 
 the joint authority of Convocation and the Crown; and in order that 
 this might be done, I wish to obtain the authority of the Crown, 
 in the manner that the Statute of Submission requires, as a real st3p 
 towards obtaining what this House has frequently expressed its 
 desire to secure— its own reform. It is desirable that the whole case 
 should be placed before her Majesty. I need not say how little is 
 really known on these points by many in authority; and, as it 
 appears most desirable to place before them as fully as possible the 
 reasons on which this desire for a reform of Convocation is based, I 
 have made the amendment rather lengthy, because I have inserted 
 in my proposal arguments, as well as the conclusions at which I 
 have arrived. I am aware that this would be to some minds ■ 
 positive objection. It is often held by some that in Addresses to the 
 Crown argument should not find a place, and it may now be urged 
 by such persons that the arguments to which I have referred might 
 be better expressed by a gravamen to the Upper House That 
 consideration, however, has not on this occasion much weight with 
 me, because, if the amendment were agreed to, their lordships will 
 judge for themselves whether it is too lengthy, and whether it is 
 desirable to put all its arguments before the Queen or not. The 
 Bishops, at any rate, will have the whole matter before them. I, 
 however, should be willing, if the House preferred it, to eliminate 
 the arguments from the resolution, and accept only so much of the 
 amendment as should set forth the principle of what I wish to see 
 carried out, and to limit my proposal to the first sentence of the 
 first paragraph and the first sentence of the second paragraph. 
 Those sentences contain the essence of my proposal, although I 
 would rather take a vote upon the whole of it. Curtailed in that 
 way it would stand as follows: — 
 
 " We would venture to represent to your Majesty that, owing to changes 
 inevitable from the lapse of time and alteration of circumstances, the repre- 
 sentation of the Clergy in the Lower House is not so complete as it is desirable 
 that it should be. We, therefore, humbly pray your Majesty to issue Letters 
 of Business directing Convocation to prepnre tlie draft of a' Canon, which, if 
 your Majesty shall see fit to issue your Royal Licence to that effect, the 
 Convocation may enact, whereby a more complete representation of the Clerev 
 in Convocation may be secured." 
 
 Archdeacon Denison— I second the motion. 
 
 The Dean of Lincoln, in moving the previous question, said— I 
 
Reform of \ LOWEIl HOUSE— June 2. 61 
 
 Convocation. ) 
 
 think I shall be able, although I have not had time to fortify myself 
 with ample documentary evidence, to bring points before the House 
 which might render many of its members more doubtful as to the 
 expediency of this amendment than they now appear to be. The 
 object of this so-called reform of Convocation is to increase the 
 number of parochial Clergy in this House — that is to say, to alter 
 the relation as to numbers between them and the other members. 
 That is the sum and substance of this amendment; the other part 
 is the way in which it is to be brought about. I would ask, 
 what is to be the practical result? If such a change is effected, 
 it would increase the number of members to nearly double. 
 I would then inquire, first, where are they to meet? On 
 Salisbury Plain, or in the cloisters of the cathedral? Or have you 
 the opportunity of assembling in some place not named? Or, if a 
 building will have to be provided, at whose cost? We must meet in 
 London, and sites are not very cheap in this city. We meet even 
 now under great inconvenience. We meet in this room entirely 
 through the kindness of the Dean of Westminster coinciding with 
 the arrangements of Westminster School ; and if even all the 
 present members of the House attended we should require a 
 larger apartment. This mechanical difficulty is, after all, the least 
 part of the subject. I see by the terms of this amendment that 
 " no new powers are sought, no change in the constitution is 
 intended, and no exclusion of nominated members." But there have 
 been proposals made here as to voluntary taxation, and if there 
 should be such a large increase of parochial Clergy new proposals of 
 that kind may be made. Parliament, however, would never 
 allow such a power to be claimed by Convocation, and no advisers 
 of the Queen would ever propose to give it powers to do any- 
 thing of the kind. But the resolution says — " Owing to 
 changes inevitable from the lapse of time and alteration of 
 circumstances, the representation of the Clergy in the Lower 
 House is not so complete as it is desirable it should be;" 
 and yet you do not notice" the large and important class of unbene- 
 ficed Clergy whose position alone justifies this language — I mean 
 the licensed Curates. If the constitution is not to be changed, where 
 is the representation of these men, who are 4,000 or 5,000 in 
 number? Nothing of that sort is contemplated. (Cries of " Oh ! ") 
 Then what do you mean by that phrase " We propose no change in 
 the constitution of Convocation "? There must be one of two things. 
 If the licensed Curates are put on the same footing as the beneficed 
 Clergy, there is a change in the constitution; and, if not, what are 
 the changes in the altered circumstances of the times which make 
 the representation not so complete as it should be? I leave Canon 
 Gregory to take which he pleases ; but I do not see how he can 
 reconcile the two. But now I will confess, with all respect to my 
 rev. brethren who have been actively engaged in sending up 
 petitions for reform of Convocation, their anxiety appears to me 
 to have arisen from a false analogy which they have imagined to 
 
62 LOWER HOUSE.— June 2. ( Reform of 
 
 \Convocation. 
 
 exist between the House of Commons and the Lower House of 
 Convocation. Those two bodies, however, represent an entirely 
 different principle— their objects are entirely different. We come, 
 at the summons of the Archbishop, for the purpose of advising 
 him on subjects on which be requires our advice ; and any other 
 matter cannot be brought before Convocation except as a gravamen 
 or as an articidus clcri. We may state a grievance and petition for 
 its removal, but our deliberations can only be set in action by the 
 Archbishop himself. 
 
 The Prolocutor— We are perfectly free to discuss without either 
 gravamina or the leave of the Archbishop. 
 
 The Dean of Lincoln— I do not at this moment remember such 
 a case. 
 
 The Prolocutor— Yes; the appointments of Committees on 
 particular subjects are frequently discussed on our own authority; 
 and in liko manner the Reports of Committees. 
 
 The Dean of Lincoln— I believe no Committee can be originally 
 appointed without the consent of the Archbishop; but, with the 
 deduction asserted by the Prolocutor, it is clear that our functions 
 are quite of a different character to those of the House of Commons. 
 Their duty is to find the funds with which to carry on the Govern- 
 ment of the country ; we come together for no such purpose, but 
 merely to advise the Archbishop on matters affecting the spiritual 
 condition of the Church. Any imaginary analogy is, therefore, 
 entirely baseless, and likely to lead to nought but unpractical results. 
 Then, again, the representation of the House of Commons being 
 that of taxpayers, nothing can be more reasonable than that the 
 representation should be coequal with the burdens to be borne. Before 
 the Reform Act of 1832 the members were returned by only a small 
 proportion of the taxpayers, and that Act proceeded on the principle, 
 not that the number of representatives should be augmented, but 
 that the number of the represented should be increased. In this 
 House thought is represented, and that is a higher, nobler, truer 
 repi-esentation than the representation of mere numbers. I 
 should like to know what school of thought in the Church does 
 not find an ample representation in this House? The baie titles of 
 the subjects on which we had so many Committees last year is a 
 convincing proof of this. [Here the Dean read the titles of most of 
 the Committees appointed in the last ten years, including such as 
 those on a Third Service, on the Ecclesiastical Courts Bill, on a 
 Uniform Hymn-book, on Firstfruits and Tenths, on Intemperance, 
 on Union with the Eastern Church, cn Exchange of Benefices, and 
 others.] In all these Committees it is impossible to find any 
 preference of one class to another; and whenever any divergence 
 has taken place there have been no traces whatever of its having 
 been between the parochial Clergy and the other members. If, 
 then, both are so fairly and fully represented on our Committees, 
 where is the grievance which renders it necessary to double the 
 
Reform of \ LOWER HOUSE — June 2. G3 
 
 Convocation.) 
 
 elected members to make them equal to the ex officio members? 
 Amongst the many merits of the late Prolocutor none were more 
 conspicuous than his spirit of justice and fairness; and I am 
 perfectly sure that in naming every Committee he was actuated by 
 an earnest desire to have represented every class, every interest, 
 and every school of thought. He was perfectly fair and just in 
 everything; and I do not think there was ever an instance in 
 which, when any Clergyman's name was suggested by anybody, he 
 did not accept it with the greatest readiness. During the whole of 
 the sixteen years I have had a seat in this House I have never 
 observed that anything depended in the least degree on whether a 
 Clergyman belonged to the ex officio, the capitular, or the elected 
 members. I believe that all interests are quite as well represented 
 in this House now as they would be if the Proctors for the Clergy 
 were three, ten, or even a hundredfold more numerous thau they 
 now are. That being the case, is it desirable to send up to her 
 Majesty a proposition of this sort, which would result in no practical 
 benefit, which rests entirely upon a false analogy, which would 
 produce great practical inconvenience, and which would not for a 
 moment be considered by any adviser of the Crown? 
 
 Canon Barlow — I second the previous question, as although 
 thei-e are many objections to the original resolution both in form 
 and substance, yet it contains principles which cannot be 
 altogether disputed. An Address to the Crown ought not to be 
 argumentative — that is not the proper spirit with which to approach 
 the Crown. If the House wishes to make a stronger representation 
 on the subject of reform it should be done in such a way that the 
 Upper House could join in it. The fact is that by inserting this 
 subject at all the Upper House has made a concession. The 
 unwillingness to move in the matter which has hitherto been 
 exhibited seems to have been overcome, and we ought to express 
 our obligation to the Upper House by accepting their terms. This 
 question has made enormous progress, and the object of the Lower 
 House should be to consolidate that progress. Are we prepared 
 without permission to prepare the draft of a Canon, as suggested 
 by Canon Gregory's resolution? I am of opinion that we should 
 not commit ourselves to proceed by way of Canon, and that there is 
 no need to ask for Letters of Business to prepare a draft. 
 
 The Prolocutor — It is quite within the competence of the 
 House to prepare the draft of a Canon, but we cannot take any 
 step towards making a Canon without licence from the Crown. 
 Letters of Business are not necessary for enacting a Canon ; they 
 are a direction to consider certain business, which then cannot be set 
 aside without discussion. They would, in fact, compel the House to 
 take action, and would besides imply the previous consent of her 
 Majesty's advisers. 
 
 Canon Rawlinson — It would have been more consistent with the 
 tone of bis speech if the Dean of Lincoln had moved the omission of 
 this subject altogether from the Address. He appeared to hold 
 
64 LOWER HOUSE— June 2. f Reform of 
 
 (Convocation. 
 
 that we wanted no change, and that the House properly represented 
 the Clergy. He did rather intimate that he was in favour of giving 
 power of voting to licensed Curates, but he did not think it worth 
 while to take up their cause. But what are the Dean's grounds of 
 objection? He first spoke of inconvenience if the number of 
 members were doubled, and asked if we were prepared to build a now 
 place of meeting. That general view is not an entirely new one. 
 Convocation has already expressed an opinion upon it. It is a 
 disgrace to the country and to the Government that Convocation 
 should be called upon by her Majesty to meet for the despatch of 
 business and that there should be no place for it to meet in ! The 
 question has from time to time been mooted, when other public 
 buildings are talked about, of a sufficient hall for Convocation, and 
 that is my answer to such remarks as those of the Dean. We have 
 continually asserted our right, and I hope it will not be long before 
 the general feeling of the country will be so unmistakably manifested 
 that the House of Commons will out of the general taxation of the 
 country provide a hall for Convocation. There is not a single word, 
 however, in the amendment to justify the Dean's supposition that 
 the advocates of reform have the slightest idea of claiming for 
 Convocation the right of taxation. Neither does the resolution put 
 aside the claim of licensed Curates to be considered in any change, 
 and when the proper time comes I shall be found amongst their 
 advocates. The Dean was quite right in saying we have here 
 different schools of thought, and in maintaining with so much force 
 that the House does represent the Church of England. That is 
 undoubtedly the case, and he might have gone further, and have 
 said that if the House were enlarged it would remain the same in 
 character and tone. Then he said Cui bono ? If the House were 
 placed upon a wider and a larger basis, it would be more generally 
 known throughout the whole country; its influence would be 
 greatly increased ; and its real representative character would not 
 only exist but be acknowledged. That is the answer to Cui bono ? 
 and that is why reform of Convocation is a most important thing. 
 
 Archdeacon Allen — I must contend that the progress of the 
 Church has rendered some change absolutely necessary. In the 
 diocese of Lichfield we should like to send one Proctor for each 
 archdeaconry. There were formerly three archdeaconries; now 
 there are four; and I see nothing to invalidate the status of Convo- 
 cation in their sending four Proctors instead of two. 
 
 Archdeacon Harrison — I am not sorry this subject has been 
 debated upon the threshold as it were of a new Convocation, as it 
 will show our rev. brethren and the country that we ai'e alive to its 
 importance. The question has, however, been almost continually 
 before Convocation ever since its revival. In 1868 an Address to 
 the Crown was agreed to by the Upper House and sent down to the 
 Lower; but Convocation was dissolved shortly afterwards, and 
 nothing came of it. The point now is whether it is expedient to 
 raise the question in a gratulatory Address to the Crown by 
 
Reform of ) LOWER HOUSE— June 2. 65 
 
 Convocation. [ 
 
 asking her Majesty to issue Letters of Business. It has been said 
 that nothing could be done without an Act of Parliament; but in 
 considering matters of this kind it should not bo forgotten that 
 Parliament has grown up under the shadow of the Church, and its 
 whole system of representation is derived from the practice of 
 Church Synods and Councils. 1 have observed in the House a great 
 objection to go to Parliament, and hence the suggestion that we 
 should go for a Canon. The Archbishop has said there is no pre- 
 cedent for proceeding by Canon. There is, however, a third mode 
 of procedure— that of the Archbishop calling the totus clems. By 
 a sort of concordat in the thirteenth century, it has been tho rule 
 to summon the Dean, the Archdeacon, one Proctor for the Chapter 
 and two for the diocese; but two new dioceses have lately been 
 formed — St. Alban's and Truro — and two new Proctors for each 
 have appeared in this House as a matter of course. But the 
 Archbishop does not like to take on himself the powor of extending 
 the representation because, on consulting the highest legal 
 authorities, he was told any such change would alter the status of 
 Convocation. The question, however, is moving on in the Ai-chi- 
 episcopal mind. 
 
 Canon Perry — At the Diocesan Conferences all over the country 
 no question was so generally discussed, and no conclusion more 
 strenuously insisted upon, than that of reform of Convocation. So 
 long as Convocation remains in its present form, and is so small a 
 representation of the Clergy, it is not held to be competent to 
 undertake any act of importance, such, for instance, as a revision 
 of the Rubrics. All Convocation can do must be done by its 
 influence upon public opinion, and its power is measured by the 
 degree of acceptance which its work receives from the parochial 
 Clergy generally. If, therefore, we have not the confidence of the 
 great body of the Clergy we can do nothing. We might constitute 
 ourselves a mutual admiration society, but we should not be the 
 representative body of the Church of England. I do not agree 
 with all the words in which it is couched, but I approve of the 
 resolution, because it puts a distinct statement of our wants in tho 
 Address to the Crown. 
 
 Chancellor Briscoe — The Dean of Lincoln has described 
 the Housos of Convocation as a council to tho Archbishop 
 of the province, and that is the view I have always taken 
 of it. When I scan the list of members I find this Houso 
 composed, in the first place, of Deans, who may be considered 
 amongst the picked men of the province. True, other than Church 
 considerations enter into their appointment in almost all cases; 
 but no Government when appointing to this office would select 
 small men. In the next place are the Ai'chdeacons, who may also 
 be fairly considered as the picked men of their several dioceses. 
 And, lastly, we have the representatives of the Chapters — men 
 chosen by the already picked men of the several dioceses. Thus, so 
 
 F 
 
66 LOWER HOUSE— June 2. S Reform of 
 
 l Convocation. 
 
 far as these members of Convocation are concerned, they have a 
 council which may be considered the most meet for the office; and 
 I do not see that any alteration of the Lower House would add to 
 the goodness of it. And then if you scan the list of the members 
 chosen by the Clergy you will find, as a rule, that they do not 
 cboosc from their own body, pure and simple. (Cries of "Yes.") 
 No; the list will sbow that considerably more than half of their 
 representatives are also members of the Chapters — Prebendaries or 
 Canons. 
 
 A Voice — Only Honorary Canons. 
 
 Chancellor Briscoe — Whether that be so or not, they are still 
 members of Chapters, and among the picked men of their several 
 dioceses. And they did wisely in so choosing, for they picked from 
 the best men. So, then, if there are more representatives, there 
 will not be a larger number of parochial Clergy pure and simple. 
 Besides this, almost all present are parochial Clergy, the Deans and 
 a few others only excepted, so that the interests of that class are not 
 neglected, and it is not necessary to add to their number in order to 
 counterbalance the members of the House who are not parochial 
 Clergy. Under these circumstances, considering that the House 
 is as good a one as could be obtained, I shall vote for the amend- 
 ment. 
 
 Canon Gregory, in reply — I think, with all deference to the Dean 
 of Lincoln, we may bope to find accommodation for two hundred 
 people without going to Salisbury Plain. We must all feel that it 
 is a great thing for us to have amongst us a representative of her 
 Majesty; as the Dean has assured us that the Queen would not 
 consent to our proposal if we made it. 
 
 Tho Dean of Lincoln — This is a personal attack, and not a 
 reply. 
 
 Canon Gregory — The question is — are we, or are we not, in favour 
 of a reform of Convocation? The Dean of Lincoln is against that 
 reform ; but I believe it is most important that we should at this 
 juncture make a declai-ation on the subject. 
 
 A show of hands was then taken, when there appeared 1l> for tho 
 previous question, and 6G against it. 
 
 Canon Gregory — It will simplify our proceedings if I now move 
 the acceptance of my resolution in its curtailed form. 
 
 Canon Hinds Howell — I second the motion. 
 
 Canon Sumner — I cannot quite agree with the motion, because 
 its words seem to represent that, owing to insufficient representa- 
 tion, we have not been able to discharge our duty properly, and for 
 that roason we desire reform. Now, I have never heard that the 
 House, as constituted at pi-esent, did not discharge its duties per- 
 fectly well. I shall support the motion, however, now that all the 
 argumentative portion is left out. 
 
Reform of > LOWER HOUSE— Jone 2. 67 
 
 Convocation. ) 
 
 Canon Butler — I agree with tlio Dean of Lincoln that this House 
 does represent, as at present constituted, the Clergy; but there 
 is a strong feeling against that view. I doubt whether any such 
 arguments would be quite satisfactory to every one, but we must 
 strive to do that which is most beneficial to the Church at large. The 
 present constitution has a great deal to recommend it. It has been 
 said that the Deans, who are not representative, should not be here, 
 but I think their presence is of the greatest possible importance. 
 Their presence does add greatly to the weight which our decisions 
 carry in the minds of the people, and I should be sorry if any 
 change should deprive us of that presence. Then the Archdeacons 
 do in a very full degreo represent the parochial Clergy; and the 
 Proctors who are elected by that class also represent them. I 
 cannot help feeling, therefore, very strongly indeed that if we 
 greatly enlarge their numbers we shall lower their status. I feel it a 
 very great honour indeed to hold the position of one of the diocesan 
 Proctors, but I should bo sorry to see the change in our status 
 which the proposed extensions would effect. I am afraid we are 
 forgetting the conclusion of the Committee, drawn up by Dr. 
 Fraser — a most interesting document — on this subject; and I am 
 afraid that it would be impossible to call on the Archbishop, with 
 any hope of success, to alter of his own proper motion the 
 mode of election, after the decided opinion of two men so very 
 different in their character as Sir Richard Bethell and Sir Robert 
 Phillimore, that the proper course would be by the enactment of a 
 Canon. It must be remembered that this is a legal assembly, but 
 still one which is not in a position to make laws for the Church, 
 although the time may arise when it may bo called upon to do so. 
 "We, however, can take no step without the consent of the Crown, 
 and I approve of Canon Gregory's resolution as admitting that fact 
 in the Address to the Crown. 
 
 Archdeacon Denison — I move that the words, "owing to 
 changes inevitable from the lapse of time and other circumstances," 
 bo omitted altogether. 
 
 Archdeacon Palmer — I second the motion. 
 
 The motion was put and carried by 34 to 20. The sentence was 
 then agreed to. 
 
 Canon Gregory — I now move the next sentence. 
 Archdeacon Palmer — I second the motion. 
 
 Canon Barlow — I beg to suggest that it would be unwise to 
 commit Convocation to the modo of proceeding specified in the 
 paragraph. 
 
 Canon Gregory — There is the same difference between a precise 
 and a definite request to the Crown that there is between proceeding 
 by Bill and proceeding by resolution in Parliament. 
 
 Sir J. E. Philipps — I was educated in this matter by the late 
 Dr. Fraser, and my belief has hitherto been that reform should be 
 
 F 2 
 
£8 LOWER HOUSE— June 2. ( to/orm of 
 
 \ Convocation. 
 
 sought in the direct action of the Archbishop; but, after the 
 opinion of Sir R. Bethell and Sir R. Phillimore, I have come round 
 to the opinion of Canon Gregory, and shall support the motion. 
 The paragraph was then agreed to in the following form : — 
 
 " We would venture to lay before your Majesty our opinion that the represen- 
 tation of the Clergy in the Lower House is not so complete as it is desirable it 
 should be. We therefore humbly pray your Majesty to issue Letters of 
 Business, directing Convocation to prepare the draft of a Canon, which, if your 
 Majesty shall see fit to issue your Royal Licence to that effect, the Convocation 
 may enact ; whereby a more complete representation of the Clergy in Convoca- 
 tion may be secured." 
 
 Canon Gregory — I withdraw the remainder of my resolution. 
 
 Archdeacon Denison — We arc living in times when the present 
 and prospective dangers to the Church of England are such as in 
 my memory are quite unexampled. I therefore move that the 
 following paragraph be added to the Address: — 
 
 " That the Convocation of Canterbury are bound by their duty to the Church 
 humbly to record upon this occasion the expression of their deep regret that it 
 should be judged necessary on the part of your Majesty's advisers to propose 
 to Parliament a measure which, if it should become law, will, for the first time 
 in the history of this country, take away from the Church of England the 
 exclusive control, according to her own doctrine and discipline, of the use of 
 her own churchyards." 
 
 Archdeacon Lear — I second the motion. 
 
 The Prolocutor — A sentence of that nature would scarcely fiud 
 a suitable place in an Address to the Crown. 
 The motion was negatived. 
 
 Archdeacon Harrison — I must remind the House that in sending 
 its Report on the Rubrics to her Majesty, Convocation inserted 
 words to the effect that it did not wish to see its recommendations 
 made the subject of legislation until another measure had become 
 law. Nevertheless the Lord Chancellor's Bill proposes to give 
 effect to that part of the Report which has reference to burials. 
 This would establish a most dangerous precedent, and I would 
 remind the House that the principle of Divide ct impera would apply 
 as well to measures as to men. I therefore propose to omit 
 altogether that paragraph of the Address which refers to the 
 Rubrics. 
 
 Archdeacon Randall — I second that. 
 
 Canon Rawlinson — I entertain quite as much jealousy for the 
 rights of Convocation as the ven. Archdeacon; but I do not think 
 the paragraph could be properly omitted. 
 
 Archdeacon Harrison thereupon withdrew his motion. 
 
 The Rev. C. R. Knight, seconded by Archdeacon Holbech, moved 
 to substitute the words " private munificence " for " the munificence 
 of your Majesty's subjects " in the ivference to the new sees. This 
 was carried by 3G to 9. 
 
Burial* Bill.] LOWER HOUSE— June 2. 
 
 GO 
 
 The Prolocutor was directed to take back the Address as amended 
 to their lordships' House. 
 
 THE LATE PKOLOCCTOB. 
 
 Canon Butler — I beg to move a vote of thanks to the Dean of 
 Lichfield for his most valuable services in the chair, and I think 
 tlie House would be chnrgeable with gratitude and un mindfulness of 
 what we owe to our late Prolocutor if wc did not seize the first 
 opportunity of putting on record our feelings towards him. We 
 must, I feci assured, entertain the highest sense of what Dr. 
 Bickersteth has done to impress upon the House that spirit of 
 kindliness, and even of brotherlincss, which ought to reign amongst 
 Christian gentlemen, and especially amongst Christian Clergymen, 
 but which, I am sorry to say, is not invariably to be met with. I 
 should also like to express my own sense of gratitude to the late 
 Prolocutor for his extreme patience and courtesy to new members. 
 
 Canon Lloyd — I hope the House will rise as one man and second 
 the motion. 
 
 This was accordingly done, but it appeared that no formal reso- 
 lution had been drafted, and, at the suggestion of the Prolocutor, 
 the motion was postponed till the next day. 
 
 Canon Payne — I beg to suggest that it be engrossed on vellum. 
 
 burials bill. 
 
 The Prolocutor — We have various notices of motion before us. 
 That of Archdeacon Denison on the form of election of Proctors; 
 one on the R< port of the Committee on our relations with the 
 Orthodox Christian Church, which has been some years on the books 
 of the House; thero is another on a Manual of Private Prayers; and 
 there are several other important motions. I believe Canon Gregory 
 is prepared with a motion on the subject of the Burials Bill, which 
 now stands for a second reading in the House of Lords. We 
 certainly have as much right to express our opinion upon that as 
 the Corporation of London has (and does not hesitate to exorcise 
 that right) on Bills brought into Parliament which affect the rights 
 of the citizens. 
 
 Canon Gregory — I have no motion to submit to the House. 
 Archdeacon Lear — I beg to move the following resolution: — 
 
 " The House acknowledges the great practical difficulty, which it has done 
 its utmost to reduce, of providing, with due regard to the claims of religion, 
 for the interments of an overgrown and yet increasing population, amongst 
 whom there may be found, which the llouso confesses with sorrow, every shade 
 
 " It concerns the House, however, greatly to find that the difficulty is pro- 
 posed to be solved by giving licence for the indiscriminate use of the ancient 
 churchyards, and by bringing to the very doors of the church the expression of 
 those divisions in the Christian body which it is the solemn duty of the Church 
 to the utmost of her power to banish. 
 
 " While the proposed system of indiscriminate use of burial-places must 
 prove again and again a special grievance and sorrow personally to many 
 
70 
 
 LOWER HOUSE— June 2. 
 
 [Burials Bill. 
 
 of the Clergy of the Established Church, it is not for their sake alone that 
 the House deplores the intended legislation. They see in it an invasion of 
 settled rights, a disturbance of landmarks, and an indirect attack upon the 
 Christian faith. 
 
 " With these convictions the House places on record their solemn protest 
 against principles such as those contained in the Burials Bill now before the 
 House of Lords, and yet hopes that some other method of dealing with the 
 difficulty may in the wisdom of the Legislature be devised." 
 
 I find amongst some members of the House — and I do not wonder 
 at it— a certain faintheartedness in dealing with this subject at all. 
 They have looked upon the conclusions which are about to be come 
 to in the Legislature as inevitable, and they have almost considered 
 it useless for us to move at all in this matter. My own opinion is 
 that it is our duty to speak out and to protest against the Bill. 
 The proposals before the House of Lords come with very great 
 authority — with a far greater authority than kindred proposals have 
 ever come at any previous time before the Legislature. It is no 
 longer the case of a private member, such as Mr. Osborne Morgan, 
 bringing a Bill before the House of Commons; but we have had 
 the matter mentioned in her Majesty's Speech at the opening of 
 Parliament, and we have the Bill now brought into the House of 
 Lords by no less a person than the Lord Chancellor. What, I 
 would ask, are the proposals of the Government? It seems fair to 
 say that their object is to relieve the consciences of a minority of 
 the subjects of this realm by creating a far heavier grievance for 
 the consciences of the majority. Now, we have this proposal in 
 the Bill — "any person or persons who shall be thereunto invited" 
 — and, as far as I understand that, it will not exclude women or 
 children — " or be authorised by the person having the charge of 
 or being responsible for such burial, may conduct such service or 
 take part in any religious act thereat " — that is, that any person 
 connected with the funeral of the deceased shall be allowed to 
 perform a service in our consecrated churchyards. In this Bill 
 there is a proposal which seems to me, as a Churchman, more 
 distressing than anything that has previously been brought before 
 the Legislature, and that is the introduction of our cemeteries 
 into the question. As far as I understand the matter, an Act was 
 passed five and twenty years ago whereby cemeteries might be 
 provided, and that Act declared that Nonconformists should be placed 
 on an exact equality with Churchmen, that there should be only 
 one ground, divided perhaps by a footpath, and that on one side there 
 should be a place for the burial of Churchmen with their chapel, and 
 on the other side a place for the burial of Nonconformists with their 
 chapel. It seems to me that the Act gave all that was necessary to 
 our Nonconformist brethren. But now it appears that the Non- 
 conformists are to be allowed at their own choice to go across the 
 boundary, and have their services in the grotmd which has been set 
 apart for the use of Churchmen. That appears a very great 
 grievance. I do not wish to be uncharitable, or to overstate the 
 case, and I am quite ready to allow that the Government desire to 
 
Bui ills Bill.] 
 
 LOWER HOUSE— June 2. 
 
 71 
 
 give some relief to the Clergy. They have, by importing into the 
 Bill the matters which are introduced in Schedule B, endeavoured 
 to meet some of our difficulties by adding to the words of the first 
 Rubric " persons who die in the commission of any grievous crime," 
 and further by legalising the use of a shortened service. Whilst, 
 on the one hand, there is that honest attempt on the part of her 
 Majesty's advisers to meet our difficulties, on the other hand they 
 inflict a terrible blow upon the Clergy. The second clause of my 
 resolution greatly affects the House. I sometimes feel when I am 
 with my brother Clergy in their parsonages and parsonage gardens, 
 with the adjoining chiu-chyard separated only by a slight fence, that 
 if I could change places with some of the promoters of the Bill — I 
 shall be doing no wrong in mentioning the names of Mr. Bright and 
 Mr. Chamberlain — if they could look from my position in the peaceful 
 parsonage into the old churchyard, I think I could make them con- 
 verts and ready almost to change their minds. I think we shall all 
 agree that it will be a special grievance and sorrow to the Clergy, who 
 have had the exclusive right of administering in our churches and 
 churchyards, to have to give up that blessed privilege. But the 
 grievance will not be confined to the mere funeral service per- 
 formed by the Nonconformists in our churchyards — we shall have 
 constant strife and dissensions amongst our people. It has been 
 said to me that this Bill, if passed, will not make much difference; 
 but I replied, "You do not know what is coming." I am certain 
 that many of the Liberation Society and Nonconformists in our 
 towns will make it their business from their pulpits to propagate 
 amongst their congregations the idea that it is their duty to mako 
 use of the rights given to them by the State. Therefore we little 
 know the extent of the evil before us. I am perfectly certain that 
 there will bo hardly a death of one of our parishioners without the- 
 question being raised throughout the parish, Is that person to be 
 buried by our Clergyman, or shall wo ask the Nonconformist 
 minister from the neighbouring parish to perform the service? 
 Therefore it is our duty to make a very solemn protest. I think we 
 may do so for the reasons I have mentioned, and also for other 
 reasons, for I do not think there is any necessity for such a measure 
 as that proposed by the Legislature. Among the other reasons is 
 the great readiness on the part of many Nonconformists to make use 
 of our churchyards and our Scriptural services. I believe there 
 may be some of our Nonconformist brethren who naay be aggrieved 
 by the present state of things; but there will also be many of them 
 who will be aggrieved by the state of things proposed for the future. 
 Many of them are perfectly contented with the state of things as they 
 are at present. I have been told that the difficulty is about the 
 burial of Dissenters, and that this Bill is to remove that difficulty. 
 Just as if Dissenters could not now be buried ! We, the Clergy, 
 are perfectly ready to allow them to be buried. We do not ask 
 questions as to whether or not this or that person is baptised. 
 What we object to is the service of Nonconformist ministers 
 
LOWER HOUSE— Jcne 2. 
 
 [Burials Bill. 
 
 being imported into our churchyards. I could mention manj 
 cases in which cemeteries have been provided for towns where 
 it was said at the time that the majority of persons dwelliug 
 in those towns were Nonconformists, but I go to the ceme- 
 teries outside those towns and I see the Church side crowded 
 with graves, while on the Nonconformist side there are very few. 
 This is a bad time for the introduction of such a Bill as this. Only 
 a few years ago an Act of Parliament was passed for the abolition 
 of compulsory Church-rates. What did that mean? It meant that 
 our Nonconformist brethren desired to be relieved from a contri- 
 bution towards the expenses of our churches and churchyards; but 
 having rid themselves of this tax these are the men who now 
 desire to be buried in your churchyards. Some of my brethren 
 seem to think that when this Bill becomes law it will be very easy 
 to make a stand, and that although they allow Dissenters to make 
 use of the churchyards there is no probability of their getting 
 into our churches. Some may think it easy; but I for one think 
 that if this measure becomes law the day may not be very far 
 distant — God grant that it may be a long way off! — -when, logically, 
 those who shall be placed in possession of our churchyards must be 
 placed in our churches. To show that I do not speak without good 
 reason, I will read you an extract from a person who is an authority 
 in the Liberation Society. They are the words of Dr. Landels, 
 spoken at the annual meeting of the Liberation Society, and they 
 are remarkable. He says: — 
 
 Let me say finally we will carry our Burials Bill, which is the next thing 
 wc have in hand, and that done we shall be a step nearer the ultimate goal. 
 There will not then be much between us and the citadel. Having taken 
 possession of all the outworks, the fortress will soon fall into our hands ; for 
 we do not conceal the fact, that this is our final aim, and that we cannot rest 
 satisfied until that aim is realised. Our clerical friends tell us with refreshing 
 simplicity that if we get into the churchyards wc shall next want to get into 
 the churches. What charming innocents they must be to put it thus ! If by 
 getting into the churches they mean that we shall demand to have national 
 property employed for national purposes, and not reserved for the exclusive use 
 of a sect, why then of course we mean to get into the churches. And what is 
 more, if our right to the churches be as good as our right to the churchyards, 
 we will succeed in gaining what we demand. 
 
 That is very plain language, and I hope that not only the Clergy I 
 now have the honour of addressing, but that our rulers in Parlia- 
 ment will understand what is the meaning of this agitation. I 
 consider it is the duty of the House to speak out at the present 
 moment, and I hope it will do so in no uudecided tones, so as to 
 make known to the Legislature and to the country what we feel in 
 this matter — that we, the Lower House of Convocation, are issuing 
 onr solemn protest against such a measure as that now before the 
 House of Lords, and that we do most earnestly trust that somehow 
 or other that measure may not become law. 
 
 Canon Puckle — I beg to second the proposal. I feel the motion 
 has been so well put before the House by the mover that it would 
 
Burials Bill.] LOWER HOUSE — June 2. 
 
 73 
 
 be more to the convenience of the House, and quite as well for the 
 due ventilation of the subject, if I refrained from speaking at any 
 length. This is a motion which is directed rather more for the 
 welfare of our brethren throughout the country who are in pos- 
 session of the ancient churchyards of the land, and I should desire 
 to draw the terms of the protest more strongly, and direct it more 
 to particular points than it now stands. But at the same time I 
 am disposed to acknowledge the wisdom of dealing rather with the 
 matter in such gentle terms as those in which these resolutions arc 
 couched, and of making as few particular points as are absolutely 
 necessary. I was never in the position of my brother member, of 
 holding one of the ancient churchyards, although I was nearly in 
 such a position. I was planted in the midst of a huge agricultural 
 parish, where almost the entire body were Dissenters, and I found 
 the feeling there was so exceedingly strong that it was almost im- 
 possible for any one to stand against it unless he was thoroughly under 
 the protection of the law, and the protection of our churchyards by 
 the law is now to be withdrawn. I cannot see the difference between 
 the invasion of certain rights, as these resolutions speak of, and the 
 invasion of rights in any other part of our national possessions, or of 
 anything in which there are vested interests which are protected by 
 the law. The Bill goes to the length of destroying two great pro- 
 visions which ai-e already amply and fully settled bylaw, as far as I 
 can understand them at all. Our great Cemeteries Act has settled 
 the question most distinctly for the welfare of all our great populous 
 places, and that which last year was called a sanitary measure, but 
 which has turned out to be a Burials Bill, has made provision for 
 carrying those local reliefs in rural parishes which have been so long 
 and so well worked in our time. It seems to me nothing more is 
 done by this Bill than upsetting a law which has worked thoroughly 
 well and to the satisfaction of all parties concerned. The largo 
 parish of which I have charge is in a town (Dover) nearly one-half 
 of which has for years been almost a by-word of Dissent. There 
 are at least 10,000 people and eleven Nonconformist places of worship. 
 You may judge, therefore, of the apparent proportion of Dissenters. 
 But, at the same time, the real proportion between the Noncon- 
 formist body and the old Church people is by no means to that 
 extent. I could show you how this thing stands and works day by 
 day in our parochial cemetery. The burial board is most ably 
 worked. There are four Nonconformists and four Churchmen on 
 it, and I am the chairman, and we have never had a harsh word. 
 On the unconsecratcd side of the cemetery no cost is entailed except 
 the actual laying into the grave. It is perfectly open to all who 
 choose to lay their dead there, but the burials during the last seven 
 years on the unconsecrated side have been 126, whereas, in spite of 
 the disadvantages on the consecrated side, 1,805 persons were 
 interred there. These are actual facts, and this is in a town which 
 is well known as an ordinary example of what we may expect to be 
 the general state of feeling with regard to consecrated and unconse- 
 
74 
 
 LOWEE HOUSE— June 2. 
 
 \_BuriaU Bill. 
 
 crated ground. If men would fairly take up and pursue tlie simple 
 instructions from the facts of the case there would be a different state 
 of feeling in the House which is now going to take up this question. 
 In this House we shall have an opportunity to raise our voice in the 
 most feeling and gentle, and, at the same time, most firm way of 
 protesting against that which we feel to be an act of injustice. 
 
 Canon Neville — I agree almost entirely with the mover and 
 seconder, but desire to propose an amendment which will be shorter, 
 and will, I think, commend itself more to the judgment of the 
 House. It is: — 
 
 " That this House desires to place on rocord its solemn protest against the 
 Burials Laws Amendment Bill now before the House of Lords." 
 
 I hope I shall not be thought to be trespassing on the rules of the 
 House, or to be at all deficient in loyalty towards our rulers, if I 
 venture to express my great regret — which I believe is shared by a 
 large majority of my brethren — that one of the first measures 
 which has been submitted for legislation by the present Parliament 
 has been one against which a very large number of influential laity, 
 including also some Nonconformists, and between fifteen and sixteen 
 thousand of the Clergy — more than two-thirds of the whole 
 number — have recently uttered a strong and vigorous protest. I 
 feel that we have now to confront a very great danger. In the first 
 place the Bill is dangerous because, instead of being a message of 
 peace and conciliation, it will stir up strife and confusion in 
 hundreds of our country parishes. I speak from an experience of 
 nearly thirty years in a country parish in the county of Essex, whero 
 there are many forms of Nonconformity ; but although during the 
 whole of that time I have lived on intimate and very friendly terms 
 with the Nonconformists, I have never heard a single expression 
 from them that they feel any grievance in this matter. On the 
 other hand, I have heard it very generally and strongly expressed 
 that if our churchyards are open there will be this element of 
 discord and confusion introduced. I look upon the Bill as dangerous 
 for another reason. Of course we must take those gentlemen who 
 have been honest and have spoken out their minds as expressing 
 what they mean, and they have plainly told us that they intend 
 very scon to get into our churches. 
 
 Canon Douglas — I second the amendment. 
 
 Pkebendaky Sadler — We ought not to get rid of a great question 
 of this kind by so short an amendment. It is onlj due to those 
 who are looking for our opinion on the subject that we should give 
 it at greater length than is now proposed. I think there ought to 
 be a very strong protest on our part respecting a matter which 
 touches our duty to the Church even more than has been recognised 
 in the resolutions before the House. When I look back to a meeting 
 which took place in this House, in which we had the Upper House 
 assembled with us, I regard with very great satisfaction the 
 protest I was then able to make respecting the whole question of 
 
Burials Bill.'] 
 
 LOWER HOUSE— June 2. 
 
 75 
 
 the Burials Bill. We arc the trustees of a godly and Christian 
 service to be performed over the dead in our churchyards, and if our 
 trusteeship is taken away from us there is not the smallest guarantee 
 that there will be a godly and Christian service. I should like to 
 put it to the House in this way — we have a service which recognises 
 the doctrines of the resurrection of the body and of a judgment to 
 come ; but those great doctrines have almost entirely fallen out from 
 the popular theology of the day. We shall very probably have per- 
 formed in our churchyards a number of services — no doubt by very 
 competent Nonconformist ministers — in which thanks will be given 
 to Almighty God that He has transferred the person who is buried 
 into glory, and entirely ignoring the resurrection of the body and 
 the judgment-seat of our Lord Jesus Christ. 
 
 Canon Neville — I withdraw my amendment. 
 
 Bishop Piers Claughton — 1 move the adjournment of the 
 debate. 
 
 Archdeacon Lear — The House should consider that, as the matter 
 is to be decided in the House of Lords to-morrow, an adjournment 
 would bo attended with some risk. Our friends in the House of 
 Lords would be very glad to be put in possession of the decision of 
 the Lower House of Convocation before they proceed with their 
 debate in the House of Lords. 
 
 Bishop Piers Claughton — It is of the greatest importance that 
 we should not come to a hasty conclusion. There is very much in 
 the resolution in which I agree; but there is much in it which 
 is not at all in accordance with the facts of the case. There 
 is no idea in the Bill before the House of Lords of the indiscrimi- 
 nate use of the churchyards, or of allowing any slight or doubt to bo 
 thrown on the Christian faith. My learned friend is mistaken as to 
 the views of the grer^ majority of leading Nonconformists. Those 
 who disbelieve in the resurrection of the body are rationalists, of 
 whom, I fear, there are not a few in our own communion. My friend 
 the Lord Chancellor has no idea of weakening the hold of the Christian 
 faith in this country ; and it seems to me that my reverend brethr'en 
 have entirely mistaken and have exaggerated the real state of things. 
 My own view is that the "special grievance" was an unreal and 
 sentimental grievance. I look upon this matter from an experience 
 which many members cannot have had. I have had to deal with 
 the burial question in my late diocese (Colombo), but, after claiming 
 absolutely and distinctly a particular cemetery as the property of 
 the Church, and having been able to establisl>that claim, I conceded 
 to our Nonconformist brethren the right to have their funerals 
 there. In that way I prevented any great scandal, and kept the 
 cemetery not only from being the battle-ground of Christian 
 Dissenters, but from heathen disturbances, and from that time there 
 has been no disagreement. If we had given the Clergy the right 
 of conceding to their Nonconformist brethren the right of decent 
 burial, the singing of a hymn, and the reading of the Scriptures in 
 
76 LOWER HOUSE-Jl-NE 2. [Burials Bill 
 
 the churchyards, there would have been no difficulty at all and 
 there would have been no excuse for the Bill. It takes a more 
 hostile form when it does not come from us as a concession. As to 
 the so-called attack upon the citadel of the Church, I may say that 
 m military matters no man concerns himself about defending a 
 tiling which has no connection with the citadel. There is no 
 connection whatever between being in the church and being in 
 the churchyards. It is said that if the Bill becomes law°thc 
 first wet day the people will want to go in totlie church ; but I 
 have seen funerals on wet days, and I have never known of any 
 such claim. All these fears are unreal. ("Oh, oh!") If the 
 House choose to express their feelings adversely to' the Bill I shall 
 not complain but to take the exaggerated and incorrect view 
 expressed in these resolutions will do us infinite harm. We shall 
 strengthen the hands of those who are bringing in the Bill and 
 not the hands of our own brethren, the Bishops in the House 
 ot Lords, who will to-morrow night be doing the thins 
 we wish. Whilst I hope we shall make the concession to 
 the Nonconformists, I do not wish to have your trustee- 
 ships altered or interfered with; but I want yon to have the 
 power of yourselves making the concession. Anything you do do 
 let it be done moderately, cautiously, and temperately And as to 
 accusing the Lord Chancellor and those who are bringing i„ the 
 Bill o. sanctioning or wishing to sanction the indiscriminate use of 
 our churchyards, those words must be withdrawn for you 
 are not saying what are the facts of the case. "Indiscriminate" 
 would include what is unchristian or unbelieving That is not 
 meant to be included. The Bill, so far as this particular clause 
 goes no further than Lord Harrowby's amendment last year I was 
 in favour of that, and am now in favour of something of the kind 
 Bat whatever you do, do not act angrily, and so make it more than 
 worthless, and cause an angry opposition on the part of your 
 enemies. This is not a Bill brought in by your enemies, but by 
 members and friends of the Church. (" No, no.") That is a, 
 matter of fact. They may gratify persons who are enemies of the 
 Church, but it is not brought iu by enemies— it is not the act of 
 enemies, and you should not speak as if persons who hold different 
 political opinions from your own arc not hearty well- wishers of the 
 Church. I claim for our Nonconformist brethren an honest 
 recognition of their common Christianity. We have no rio-ht to 
 speak of them as being hostile or unchristian. I would far rather 
 see my Nonconformist parishioners kneeling round the grave of one 
 of their brethren giving utterance to their Christian hymns— for 
 they are Christian hymns— thau attempt to treat all Noncon- 
 formist Christians as if their belief was not to be distinguished 
 from anti-Christianity or infidelity, which is the shame°of our 
 age and the blot on our nation, and which we should try hand in 
 hand with the Nonconformists, to prevent and root out of our land 
 Archdeacon Denison— The Bishop has taken upon himself to 
 
Burials Dill ] 
 
 LOWER HOUSE- June 2. 
 
 77 
 
 deliver us a lecture, such as I have heard only on one other previous 
 occasion, and I think it is extremely unseemly. It is perfectly open to 
 him to have his opinion; but I think ho might have had the charity 
 to think his brethren might differ in toto, and yet have the same 
 earnest conviction that he has. We only state the facts of the case, 
 and I think the feeling of the House was almost unanimous until he 
 got up and said there was exaggerated langunge in the resolutions. 
 1 am not concerned with the opinions of those who may be the 
 fathers of this Bill, but I know very well that this Bill is brought 
 in to please persons who are entirely hostile to the Church of 
 England ; and yet people come here and venture to use fine language 
 about the Nonconformists, as if all the charity and good feelings 
 resided amongst them. The Bishop has charged this House with 
 using immoderate and incorrect language. 
 
 Bishop Plans Claugiiton — I only said that I believed — wrongly 
 or rightly — that the words of the resolution are not in accordance 
 with the state of things. 
 
 Archdeacon Denison — You did not say wrongly or rightly. You 
 asserted it as a fact. I know perfectly well the feeling of the Non- 
 conformist body, and can trace it back for the past forty years. 
 This measure is brought in for them, and will cause the destruction 
 of the Church of England. The House should take notice of it in 
 the same sense in which it is brought in. I should feel I had not 
 done my duty if I did not protest against such an Act as that now 
 proposed to be obtained, for the first time in the history of this 
 country surrendering into the hands of the enemy of the Church — 
 for enemies they are — I do not say enemies altogether in the religious 
 sense — but enemies of the Church as by law established in this 
 country. They will never be satisfied until they have destroyed it, 
 and they know this is one of the greatest steps they can make 
 towards its destruction. I say the whole spirit of Nonconformity has 
 changed. The Dissenters are Nonconformists now, not on religious, 
 but on political grounds ; and we have no alternative but to meet 
 them straight out on their own ground, and say, " So help us God, 
 this shall not be." If it is to be that might is to overcome right — 
 and that because there is a Government which depends almost 
 entirely upon the Nonconformist body, its first act is to bring in a 
 Bill to destroy, step by step, the position of the Church of England 
 as far as Parliament can do it — it is high time for this House to 
 speak. I feel deeply grieved that such language should be used. I 
 am not going to be governed by false and specious arguments. I 
 have been sent by God into this world to do what I can in my 
 huinble way to maintain the Church of England, and for the first 
 time in the history of this country I am exposed to seeing people 
 bringing in a Bill in Parliament, for what purpose? — for absolutely 
 destroying the ancient control of the Church of England of con- 
 ducting the services in her own churchyards, and she is to give way 
 and be treated only on sufferance. There are fine honeyed words in 
 
78 
 
 LOWER HOUSE— Jone 2. 
 
 [Burials Bill. 
 
 the Bill as to preserving decency; but what is the use of the words 
 when you look at the Act? The Act is sufficient to move every 
 man who cares for the Church of England to resist, this Bill We 
 shall not succeed. But it is a much better thing to be beaten and 
 do a right thing; and even if there was no use in passing this vote 
 you should pass it all the same, and do not let us be set aside by 
 charges of want of moderation. 
 
 Archdeacon Palmer — I do not intend to discuss in this assembly 
 the provisions of the Bill, but considering the name I bear I am 
 anxious to give an honest and not a silent vote. Two years a^o 
 when I really thought the Conservative millenium had set in° I 
 expressed openly an opinion in this House in favour of the principle 
 ot this Bill, and, consequently, as my opinions remain unchanged I 
 must vote against the resolution. 
 
 Canon Lowe— It is with great hesitation and with some reluc- 
 tance that, almost on the first occasion of my taking my seat in this 
 venerable House, I venture to obtrude on your attention • but the 
 subject is so grave and the interest is so deep, and the words just 
 uttered as to the want of courage in giving a silent vote have urged 
 me to the somewhat bold step of expressing the feelings that 
 influence me on this occasion. I respond most heartily°to the 
 stirring words of my long-tried friend, Archdeacon Denison and 
 like him, desire to say I have lived only for the service o'f the 
 Church of England, and it is her defence I desire to-day, takino- a 
 broader view of the question than has been urged by this House. 
 I am led not to come to a hasty decision on narrow grounds 
 there is no member of this House who regards the Bill with 
 more mixed feelings and anxieties than I do ; there is no member 
 whose sentiment and traditional feeling is more wounded, and I 
 think outraged, than mine is by some of the provisions of this Bill- 
 but there are some considerations which influence my miud and 
 which I venture to express to my brethren around me. I think we 
 may consider it an occasion when a grave and strong formal 
 protest may be made; and, holding that opinion, I much regret that 
 Canon Neville agreed to give up his shorter form, which was grave 
 dignified, and concise, and well became the dignity of this House' 
 Our case is not strengthened when there is imported into it 
 debateable matter both in form and substance. I think our 
 position is strengthened by admitting, as I believe the Arch- 
 deacon of Taunton does, that there is very little hope that our 
 protest will avail to stop the course of political events. But we 
 ought to take the opportunity of bringing to the front what I 
 believe is lying in the background in the minds of ns all; and 
 avoiding any very warm expression of feeling, we 'ono-ht 
 to take this opportunity of firmly and distinctly laying down 
 the principle of admitting the difficulties of the present state of 
 things as regards the burial-grounds. I allow that there is a real 
 grievance to Dissenters, who are my fellow-citizens— although I 
 
Burials Bill.'] 
 
 LOWER HOUSE— June 2. 
 
 79 
 
 am not sure they are my ecclesiastical brethren — but as my fellow- 
 citizens having claims to fairness and consideration, uuder those 
 laws which allow full toleration to all religions convictions, they 
 have a grievance which the Archdeacon does not set aside — that 
 they have to submit to the form imposed by the State. I have 
 heard the grievance of my brethren, and have shared with them the 
 grievance resulting from being a State officer, and being obliged 
 to perform the Burial Service over persons. I have heard this 
 spoken of as a privilege which Clergy of the Church of England 
 considered it a grievance to be deprived of. I have taken a funeral 
 service for a friend, and afterwards found I have buried a person 
 whom my friend would not have buried himself. These are 
 circumstances not of rare occurrence. When a Clergyman is 
 called upon to bury such " in sure and certain hope of the 
 Resurrection," and pronounces these words, they are a cause of 
 great uneasiness to him. If this Bill does something towards 
 the relief of this difficulty — I do not say that it will be an 
 adequate relief or that the alternative service is satisfactory — but if 
 it provides us with some measure of relief, that is something to be 
 thankful for, and above all it clears away the last pretence of the 
 grievance, and it enables us to-night — if you decide to express an 
 opinion to-night — to record our solemn protest against the measure 
 in itself. I would humbly suggest that we should not enter into 
 the discussion of the merits of the case, but simply record our 
 protest, and couple with that an expression of a firm determination 
 to uphold to the full the Established Church, as necessary to the 
 liberties and religious interests of this country. 
 
 The Dean of Chichester — I move the adjournment of the 
 debate, and give notice that I shall move the adoption of a solemn 
 protest. 
 
 The following notices of motion on this subject wore then 
 given : — 
 
 The Rev. P. Constable Ellis: — 
 
 " Inasmuch as it is openly avowed that the admission of Dissenters into the 
 graveyards of the Church for the burial of their dead is claimed as a step 
 towards Disestablishment, and the concession of such claim would therefore not 
 have the effect of putting a stop to agitation and securing peace, the Burials 
 Bill now before Parliament ought not, in the judgment of this House, to be pro- 
 ceeded with, because, while it provides for the partial disestablishment of the 
 Clergy as to their spiritual functions in relation to the burial-grounds of the 
 Church, it encourages further legislation in the same direction, and it would bo 
 preferable that all the objects sought to be obtained by Disestablishment should 
 be set forth and dealt with than that the Church should be weakened by a 
 gradual process of Disestablishment." 
 
 Archdeacon Randall (as a rider) : — 
 
 " That whilst this House solemnly protests against the passing of the said 
 Bill as subversive of the just rights of the members of the Church of England, 
 and detrimental to the interests of true religion, it humbly and earnestly prays 
 your Grace, if it should seem fit to you and our spiritual fathers the Bishops, to 
 
80 
 
 LOWER HOUSE— June 2. 
 
 [Burial t Bill. 
 
 i. to ether the members of this House as early as possible, that thev may 
 ."' e , t ' 0 " s "' 1 together upon the course which, in the event "of the 
 II kc omiiiL' law, it may be desirable to adopt, so as best to secure submission 
 to tue law ut the land, preserve peace amongst all Christian people, and promote 
 tne weltare ot our Church and nation." 
 
 Canon Wilkinson (also as a rider) : — 
 
 " That this House especially desires by its solemn protest to deliver itself of 
 all ivspons.b.hty as to any dishonour which may be done to Almighty God bv 
 the character of the worship which, in the event of the passing of thisBiU, may 
 hereafter be offered in our churchyards." } 
 
 ^ h £. Benediction was pronounced by the Archdeacon of Stow 
 (the Bishop-Suffragan of Nottingham), and the Prolocutor after- 
 wards stated that he had received the directions of his Grace the 
 President to continue and prorogue the present sitting of this 
 House until the following day, Thursday, June 3, to a certain 
 Upper Chamber, called the Board-room, of the Bounty-office, situate 
 in Dean s Yard, Wostminster, at eleven o'clock in the forenoon. 
 
Address to i UPPER HOUSE— June 3. 81 
 
 the Queen.) 
 
 Session V. — Thursday, Jane 3, 1880. 
 
 UPPER HOUSE. 
 
 Their lordships met at two o'clock. His Grace the Archbishop 
 presided. There were also present the Bishops of London, 
 Llandaff, St. Alban's, Hereford, Salisbury, Chichester, Bath and 
 Wells, Oxford, St. Asaph, Ely, Exeter, Truro, and Lichlield. 
 Prayers were read. 
 
 PETITIONS. 
 
 Petitions were presented — 
 
 By the President — from the Archdeaconry of Colchester, the 
 Rural Deaneries of Midhurst, Lewes, Sutton, Sarum, Plyinpton, 
 Exeter, Stafford, Salisbury, and Devon, praying for an increase 
 in the number of Proctors. 
 
 this address to the queen. 
 
 The President — The Address came back from the Prolocutor of 
 the Lower House at eleven o'clock this morning. I received it in 
 your lordships' absence when I opened this House, and I will now 
 read the amendments which are proposed by the Lower House. In 
 Clause 4, instead of the words as they stand, they propose after 
 "was " to insert the words "duly submitted to her Majesty." The 
 original passage stood thus: — "The last Convocation of tho 
 Province of Canterbury endeavoured to discharge the duty which 
 your Majesty graciously committed to it in the Royal Letters of 
 Business issued on the 6th of July, 1874, and the result of their 
 deliberations was that on the 15th day of August last there was 
 placed in the hands of your Majesty's principal Secretary of State," 
 &c, for which they wish to substitute " duly submitted to your 
 Majesty." This is a matter of no consequence, and I suppose your 
 lordships will not object to the amendment. Then, instead of tho 
 words respecting the new sees — " We rejoice that three of the six 
 new sees, for the foundation of which arrangements have been made 
 in Parliament with your Majesty's consent, are already endowed by 
 the munificence of your Majesty's subjects," they wish to substitute 
 the words " by private munificence." I suppose there can be no 
 objection if the Lower House like the latter words better. Then 
 there comes the following sentence : — 
 
 It is a great satisfaction to us to know that in one of these dioceses — that 
 of Truro — his Royal Highness the Prince of Wales was pleased to be present 
 as Duke of Cornwall. 
 
 They wish to say " graciously pleased." I explained to the Pro- 
 
 Q 
 
82 UPPER HOUSE— June 3. (Addreu to 
 
 \ the Queen. 
 
 locutor that in this connection it is not suitable to use the word 
 " gracious " except in reference to her Majesty. The Prolocutor 
 quite acquiesced in that view of the matter. Then there is the 
 sentence: — 
 
 We believe that the Church of England retains its hold over the affections 
 of your Majesty's subjects, and that, while its usefulness at home is daily 
 increasing, it is spreading throughout all the dependencies of your Majesty's 
 empire, and has of late years conciliated to itself in a remarkable degree the 
 regard of many other Christian Churches throughout the world. 
 
 Instead of that the Lower House desire to substitute " the regard 
 of other branches of Christ's Church throughout the world." That 
 is practically the same thing as the omission of the word " many." 
 Next comes an amendment of some importance. In the Address 
 as sent down from your lordships' House the following passage 
 occurs: — 
 
 It has been represented to us that our Convocation might better discharge 
 its duties if some addition were made to the number of its Proctors in the 
 Lower House, and we desire to bring this subject under the notice of your 
 Majesty. 
 
 The Lower House propose the following alteration in that 
 sentence: — 
 
 We would venture to lay before your Majesty our opinion that the repre- 
 sentation of the Clergy in the Lower House is not so complete as it is desirable 
 that it should be. We, therefore, humbly pray your Majesty to issue Letters 
 of Business directing Convocation to prepare the draft of a Canon which, if 
 your Majesty shall see fit to issue your Eoyal Licence to that effect, the Convo- 
 cation may enact, whereby a more complete representation of the Clergy in 
 Convocation may be secured. 
 
 That is an important alteration, because it states to her Majesty 
 that we are of opinion that the proper way of increasing the 
 numbers of the House is by a Canon after Letters of Business for 
 that purpose have been issued to us. 
 
 The Bishop of St. Alban's — I think there can be no harm in 
 stating that. 
 
 The President — I am afraid by that you may invite an imme- 
 diate refusal to proceed with this matter at all, whereas if you leave 
 it to the wisdom of her Majesty and her Majesty's advisers to find 
 out what is the right way of proceeding you do not invite refusal. 
 This proposal, as suggested by the Lower House, would be at once 
 referred to the Law Officers of the Crown. We know what their 
 opinion is, and what their answer would be. 
 
 The Bishop of St. Alban's — The present Law Officers are new in 
 their office, and I think it is very likely to be ratified. 
 
 The President — If, after such a request, they were to give an 
 adverse opinion, there would be an end of the whole thing. 
 
 The Bishop of London — We received a reply from the Law 
 Officers some years ago, and the answer was adverse to this. 
 
 The President — Many hold that the Archbishop of Canterbury 
 
Address to > UPPER HOUSE— June 3. 83 
 
 the Queen. \ 
 
 has the power of altering the constitution of Convocation, though 
 this is in opposition to what has been said in very high legal 
 quarters. 
 
 The Bishop of Salisbury — This is an Address of loyalty and 
 affection, and it is going somewhat out of the way to introduce this 
 matter as it was originally introduced by this House. But it is 
 reasonable to introduce it, as it is a subject of such great interest to 
 the parochial Clergy. Therefore I think it might be mentioned in a 
 general way, leaving it to the Law Officers of the Crown to suggest 
 the particular method of dealing with the matter. Still, I think 
 the disproportion of introducing the subject at this length in an 
 Address of loyalty and affection comes out very strongly. 
 
 The President — Shall I read Dr. Deane's opinion? 
 
 The Bishop of London — It has been printed several times in the 
 Chronicle of Convocation. 
 
 The Bishop of Lichfield — Have we got the opinion of the Law 
 Officers of the Crown? 
 
 The Bishop of London — There were three courses proposed. 
 Bethell and Phillimore gave an opinion that the Archbishop, with 
 the consent of the Queen, might vary the constitution of Convoca- 
 tion. This opinion was sent to her Majesty's Ministers, who 
 submitted it to the Crown lawyers. They decided that it was 
 wrong, and that the thing could not be done without having also 
 the authority of Parliament. Then there is an opinion which 
 many of the Clergy hold as an absolute truth, that there is nothing 
 whatever to prevent the Archbishop from doing it mero motu; but 
 the present Lord Chancellor states his opinion very distinctly that 
 it could not be done except by the authority of Parliament as well 
 as that of the Crown. What the other Law Officers might say I do 
 not know. 
 
 The President — After the opinion formerly given hy the Law 
 Officers of the Crown I fear it would be difficult for her Majesty's 
 Government to advise her Majesty to comply with the prayer of 
 the Address. The question before us at the present moment is 
 whether, in the face of all these opinions, it is wise to ask for what 
 will no doubt be refused. 
 
 The Bishop of Lichfield — Have we any ground for thinking it 
 would he refused? 
 
 The President — The opinions of the present Law Officers of the 
 Crown would immediately be taken. They would refer to the 
 opinion of the late Law Officers, and would refuse the request as a 
 matter of course. 
 
 The Bishop of London — All we represent is that we consider it 
 desirable that there should be an increase in the number of the 
 Proctors. That would raise the question, and it would be for her 
 Majesty's advisers to consider how the object aimed at could best 
 be attained. They might, perhaps, refer the question to us and ask 
 what we thought about it. 
 
 G2 
 
&t UPPER HOUSE — Jest 3. jAddressto 
 
 (tU Queen. 
 
 The Bishop of Oxford — I object very much to what the Lower 
 House lias sunt up, for the question is, to my mind, by no means 
 clear. I believe this subject has never been dealt with by Canon, 
 nor do I see anything in the Canons that is at all germane to this. 
 There is nothing in the Canons bearing on the constitution of 
 Convocation. That being so I should not like to be a party to 
 asserting that that is the right way to deal with the question. 
 Those who think it is within your Grace's power to vary within 
 certain limits the constitution of Convocation ought not to agree to 
 the amendment of the Lower House. I therefore beg to move that 
 this House do not agree with it. 
 
 The Bishop of St. Asaph — I think it will be much wiser to 
 adhere to the words of our own Address, and thus leave the question 
 open for the Government to decide, instead of taking it into our 
 own hands. 
 
 The Bishop of Lichfield — I should like to move that no mention of 
 this subject be made in this Address, and that a separate memorial 
 be sent to her Majesty afterwards. 
 
 The President — We have already sent this down to the other 
 House, and we must either agree to their amendment or disagree to it. 
 
 The Bishop of Bath and "Wells — We might express a little 
 stronger opinion than we did before, and yet not point out the 
 precise mode of action. 
 
 The Bishop of Salisbury — I beg to second the motion of the 
 Bishop of Oxford, that we disagree with the amendment of the 
 Lower House. 
 
 The motion was then put and carried. 
 
 The Prolocutor, with his Assessors, shortly afterwards attended 
 in the Upper House, when 
 
 The President, addressing them, said — Their lordships have 
 considered the amendments which you were good enough to make 
 in the proposed Address. Their lordships agree to the first, substi- 
 tuting " duly submitted to her Majesty," instead of the words as 
 they at present stand. As to the substitution of the words 
 " endowed by private munificence," they also agree. As to the 
 insertion of the word "graciously," they are disposed to think 
 that, as the word has been applied immediately before to her 
 Majesty, it ought to be reserved to her Majesty herself, and there- 
 fore that it ought not to be inserted. In regard to the substitution 
 of " other branches of Christ's Church throughout the world," 
 instead of the words as they at present stand, their lordships are 
 quite ready to assent to that proposal. But when we come to 
 Clause 9, their lordships dissent, for these reasons. We believe 
 that the words we used leave it perfectly open in what mode 
 this may be done. We are aware that a number of persons 
 throughout the country have a very strong opinion that it could 
 be done by the sole authority of the Primate, and wc are also 
 
Notices of) LOWER HOUSE— June 3. 85 
 
 Motion. ( 
 
 aware that some lawyers nro of opinion that it could not bo dono 
 by a Canon; and we think it would be indecorous to press upon 
 her Majesty one particular mode of dealing with this matter wlien 
 there may be others which her Majesty may bo advised to take. Wo, 
 therefore, dissent from the amendment of the Lower House. On tho 
 whole, also, wo are of opinion that to enter in detail on a matter of 
 this kind is somewhat alien to the nature of an Address to tho 
 Throne such as we are presenting. We, therefore, feel ourselves, 
 on the motion of the Bishop of Oxford, seconded by the Bishop of 
 Salisbury, unable to assent to that proposal. 
 
 The Prolocutor — I will state in the other House what your Graco 
 lias said. 
 
 JOINT COMMITTEES. 
 
 Several members of their lordships' House were nominated on the 
 joint Committees .originally appointed in the last Convocation to 
 consider the Revision of tho Bible, Sisterhoods and Deaconesses in 
 the Church of England, and the providing of a house for tho 
 meetings of the Convocation of the Province of Canterbury. 
 
 The Prolocutor and his Assessors then retired. 
 
 EXPENSES OF CONVOCATION. 
 
 The Prolocutor brought up a statement of the expenses of Con- 
 vocation, amounting to 315/., of which he said one-third was by 
 custom cast on tho Upper House. 
 
 The President — They will be met by an assessment being mado 
 in the usual manner. 
 
 The schedule of prorogation was then read, by which the sitting 
 was prorogued to the following day. 
 
 LOWER HOUSE. 
 
 The Very Rev. the Dean of Worcester, Prolocutor, presided. 
 
 Prayers were said by the Prolocutor, the Prceconizatiou of 
 Members was made by tho Actuary, and the Minutes of the 
 previous Session were read and confirmed, and ordered to be reduced 
 into Acls, according to the ancient practice of Convocation. 
 
 The Prolocutor named as his Assessors for the present Session 
 the Deans of Westminster and St. David's; the Archdeacons of 
 Maidstone, Surrey, Sudbury, Stow, and Sarum ; Canons Rawlinson 
 Lowe, l'ucklc, Perry, Sir J. E. Philipps, and the Rev. P. C. Ellis. 
 NOTICES OF MOTION. 
 
 Bishop Piers Claugiiton — That for the superintendence of 
 English congregations, and the preservation of communication with 
 other Churches, it is desirable that a Bishop of the English Church 
 should be placed in North Europe. 
 
86 
 
 LOWER HOUSE— June 3. ( Matter, 
 
 \ Parliamentary. 
 
 Archdeacon Nevill — That it be referred to the Committee on 
 Occasional Services to prepare a form of service for public and 
 private use during the dissolution of Parliament. 
 
 Archdeacon Iles — That the Standing Orders be suspended 
 to-morrow, in order that the House may have the opportunity of 
 discussing the Friday morning aspect of the Burials Bill. 
 
 PETITIONS. 
 
 By Aiichdeacon Sanctuary — Signed by the Bishop of Salisbury, 
 on behalf of the Clergy and Laity of the diocese in Synod 
 assembled, against alteration at present in the Book of Common 
 Prayer, and in favour of forms of service for special occasions. 
 
 By Canon Pownall — (1) Signed by the Rural Deanery and ten of 
 the Clergy of Brackley (second portion); (2) by the Rural Dean 
 and twelve of the Clergy of Sparkenhoe (second portion) ; (3) by 
 the Rural Dean and seven of the Clergy of Guthlaxton (third 
 portion) ; (4) by the Rural Dean and eight of the Clergy of West 
 Akeley, all in the diocese of Peterborough, and all in favour of an 
 increase of Proctors for the Clergy. 
 
 GRAVAMIKA. 
 
 A Schedule of Gravamina in reference to the claim made by the 
 officials of the diocese of Norwich upon the Proctors elected for the 
 Clergy on account of the election expenses, was read by Canon 
 Hinds Howell; and on his motion, seconded by Archdeacon 
 Holbech, it was agreed that the gravamina should be referred to the 
 Committee on the Election of Proctors for Convocation. 
 
 reports of committees. 
 
 Archdeacon Hesset — I present a Report from the Committee 
 on Diocesan Conferences, and move that it be printed for the use of 
 Convocation. 
 
 Canon Neville — I second the motion. 
 
 Agreed to. (See Appendix.) 
 
 Canon Yard — I present a Report of the Committee on Intercom- 
 munion with the Orthodox Eastern Churches, and move that it be 
 printed for the use of Convocation. 
 
 Canon Butler — I second the motion. 
 
 Agreed to. (See Appendix.) 
 
 MATTERS I'ARLIAMENTAHY. 
 
 It was agreed that a Bill in the House of Lords, entitled " An 
 Act to Amend the Book of Common Prayer," be referred to the 
 Committee on Privileges; that the Bill in the House of Commons 
 for amending the Ecclesiastical Dilapidation Act, 1871, as to the 
 insurance of buildings be referred to the Committee on First- 
 fruits and Tenths; that the Bill in the House of Commons for 
 extending the hours in which marriages may be lawfully 
 solemnised be referred to the Committee on Canons; and that 
 
The late i LOWER HOUSE— June 3. 87 
 
 Prolocutor. ) 
 
 the Bills, also in tho House of Commons, for " Altering and 
 Amending the Law with regard to the Marriage of Divorced 
 Persons," and for " Legalising Marriage with a Deceased Wife's 
 Sister " be referred to the same Committee. 
 
 On the motion of Prebendary Gibbs, seconded by Sir F. Gore 
 Ouselet, it was agreed that each Committee of this House to 
 which a Parliamentary Bill has been or shall be referred shall be 
 at liberty to act in respect to the same as circumstances may require 
 when Convocation is not in session. 
 
 THE IiATE PROLOCUTOR. 
 
 Canon Butler — I move: — 
 
 " That this House, in renewing its deliberations Juno 1, 1880, unanimously 
 agree to a vote of thanks to the Very Rev. Edward Bickersteth, Doctor of 
 Divinity, Dean of Lichfield, for his able and valued services as Prolocutor 
 during a period of fifteen years, embracing no less than four Convocations. It 
 desires to record its vivid recollection of his invariable courtesy and patience, 
 his high sense of justice, his wise and happy regulation of its debates ; and now 
 that this prolonged and affectionate connection has been brought to an end by 
 his retirement from his late honourable and important office, this House cannot 
 refrain from offering its best wishes and expressing an earnest hope that health 
 and strength may be vouchsafed to him, to enable him, both in this Convocation 
 and elsewhere, by his zeal and wisdom to serve the Church of God." 
 
 The Dean of Chichester — I second the motion. This is not an 
 ordinary vote of the House, and I for one thank Canon Butler for 
 the expressive and touching terms in which it alludes to the friendly 
 relations which always existed between the late Prolocutor and the 
 House. Would it not be more graceful to convey our thanks in a 
 private letter from the Prolocutor in the name of the House, 
 expressing our strong and warm feelings of affection and esteem? 
 
 Canon Butler — All the friends I have consulted agree with me 
 that a vote of thanks from this House would be more telling and 
 more dignified than any letter we could send. 
 
 The Dean of Chichester — I did not mean to supersede the vote 
 of thanks. 
 
 The Prolocutor— The House owes a deep debt of gratitude to 
 the lato Prolocutor for the courtesy, the carefulness, the iudustry 
 and learning with which he filled this high office. I feel it very 
 much ; and the difficulties I must experience in succeeding so worthy 
 and so able a man. 
 
 Archdeacon Harrison — On the last occasion of this kind, the 
 outgoing Prolocutor, Dean Peacock, was preseut to receive the 
 thanks offered to him. 
 
 Canon Payne — I think, as in this case a copy of the vote will be 
 forwarded, it might be engrossed on vellum. 
 
 The House testified its acceptance of the resolution by standing, 
 when the question was put by the Prolocutor, and it was agreed 
 that the resolution should be signed by the Prolocutor, and trans- 
 mitted by him to the Dean of Lichfield. 
 
88 
 
 LOWER HOUSE— June 3. 
 
 [Burials Bill. 
 
 ADDRESS TO THE CROWN. 
 
 During the Session, the Prolocutor, in obedience to a summons 
 from his Grace the President, proceeded to the Upper House, 
 accompanied by his Assessors. On his return, he said— I have to 
 state to the House that their lordships have accepted the amend- 
 ments agreed to by this House in the proposed Address to the 
 Crown, with the exception of the word " graciously " in paragraph 7, 
 and of the clause substituted by this House on the motion of Canon 
 Gregory, paragraph 9. 1 presume that the Lower House will not 
 insist upon retaining the word "graciously;" but -with regard 
 to the other and more important question — namely, the proposal 
 to apply for Letters of Business for the reform of Convocation — 
 I must request the immediate attention of the House to the 
 subject. 
 
 Canon Gregory — The point is of so much importance that if 
 time permitted I should say that the best course would be to request 
 a conference; for it seems to me that if we put the matter ia the 
 indefinite way proposed by the Upper House the matter may be post- 
 poned to the Greek Kalends. But, under the circumstances, I am 
 disposed to advise the House to acquiesce in the decision of their 
 lordships, and to embody the omitted paragraph in a separate 
 Address to the Crown. 
 
 The Dean of Chichester — I move that the House agree to the 
 decision of their lordships with regard to the amendments made in 
 this House on the proposed Address ; and that the words " and 
 Clergy " be inserted in the space left for the purpose. 
 
 The Dean of Lincoln — I second the motion. 
 
 The motion was put aud agreed to nem. con. 
 
 BURIALS BILL. ADJOURNED DEBATE. 
 
 The Dean of Chichester — I rise to move the following amend- 
 ment:— 
 
 " That fchia House places on record its solemn protest against the Bill now 
 before the House of Lords for altering the law of burial. In the judgment 
 of this House that Bill is unjust in principle ; infringes the rights, prescrip- 
 tive and statutory, of the Church of England ; is fraught with danger to 
 the highest interests of the realm ; and, while it aims at removing an 
 alleged grievance from a minority of the community, will (if it becomes 
 law) create an intolerable grievance for every faithful member of the Church 
 of England." 
 
 I am entirely in accord with all the speakers who preceded me, 
 except the Archdeacon of London and the Archdeacon of Oxford. 
 From the former I differ toto civlo. All will agree, however, in the 
 passing tribute paid to the personal merits of the present Lord 
 Chancellor, and I hope my amendment will not for a moment be 
 understood as indicating any want of regard for the noble .and 
 learned lord ; bnttbis is not a question of private feeling, and the 
 Government Burials Bill I cannot help regarding as highly injurious 
 to the Church and realm. Canon Neville's amendment is too curt, 
 
Burials Bill.] LOWER HOUSE — June 3. 
 
 89 
 
 and that of Archdeacon Lear too weak, particularly in its preamble. 
 By certain words of my amendment — viz., " fraught with danger to 
 the highest interests of the realm " — I desire to indicate what is 
 the inevitable and logical tendency of the Bill — for, to speak quite 
 plainly, the blow aimed at the Church of England indirectly 
 affects the stability of the Crown. All who have read history 
 know that, in the natural sequence of events, when the Church is 
 overthrown, it next follows that the Crown is assailed. 
 
 Canon Lowe — I second the amendment. I desire that whatever 
 resolution the House comes to it should be as nearly unanimous as 
 possible. I view the subject from a different point of view to that 
 of the mover of the amendment, and should, therefore, have been 
 glad if the words which imply a censure upon the Legislature 
 were withdrawn. I admit that the Bill inflicts a harsh and cruel 
 injustice upon the Clergy, but I had rather sec them bear the 
 burden in silence. At the same time we must in candour admit 
 that our Nonconformist fellow-citizens are also smarting under a 
 grievance — whether real or imaginary I will not now discuss ; and 
 to them it would be a measure of relief. If our teeth are set on 
 edge, it is with the sour grapes — the idleness or indifference — of 
 our forefathers, of which the present attitude of the Nonconformists 
 may be the result. It becomes us, therefore, to bear with calmness 
 and patience, and a sense of humiliation, the punishment which has 
 come upon us. But I consider that this is an occasion when a body 
 so high and dignified as this Convocation ought not to be backward 
 in protesting against so gross an invasion of the rights of the 
 Church, both prescriptive and statutory. Our prescriptive rights 
 are part of the history of the country, for the churchyards have 
 been placed, by the unbroken consent of the people ever since the 
 introduction of Christianity, under the trusteeship of the Church 
 and of the parochial Clergy. When I speak of an invasion of our 
 statutory rights I allude to the cemeteries, or rather to those 
 consecrated portions which by a recent Act of Paxdiament were 
 placed under the charge of the Church, and which now are most 
 unreasonably and recklessly thrown open to everybody. For this 
 I hopo some remedy may be found; but it is our duty to 
 protest against the wrong. I trust that the All-wise Disposer 
 of events will in His own way overrule these difficulties so 
 as once more to make the Church of England the Church of 
 the people; and that the laity will again turn to the parson of the 
 parish as the best and most fitting custodian of the churchyards. 
 No doubt the results of this measure will have serious effects on the 
 religion of the country, and, as the Dean of Chichester has truly 
 said, the step from the Church to the prerogatives of the Crown is 
 but a short one. The preservation of the Established Church is 
 necessary for the maintenance of the religious liberties of the people, 
 and the welfai-e more especially of the poorest. 
 
 Archdeacon Allen — I am unwilling to speak on this occasion, 
 because I feel I shall have but little sympathy from the members of 
 
90 
 
 LOWER HOUSE— Jdne 3. [Burial* Bill. 
 
 this House; but I rise to put it to you whether it would not be 
 more dignified to accept what Parliament does without a word either 
 of censure or approval. We must consider the state of parties in 
 this country. We must consider the course of events, and the grounds 
 on which the present Government has been returned to power. 
 We must consider, too, that it has to do a work of great difficulty 
 arid delicacy ; and I think the Government has done it in a spirit 
 of courtesy. I am not a politician; and during the forty-five years 
 I have been a householder I have never voted for a member of 
 Parliament; but speaking of politicians, I think we ought to be 
 grateful for what they have done for the relief of the Clergy. It is 
 a great relief to be excused from the necessity and the responsibility 
 of reading the Burial Service to unwilling ears and unsympathetic 
 hearts. I believe — although I confess I cannot quite make out 
 how it is — that a real relief was intended by giving us the right of 
 omitting, on certain occasions, what has been painful to many of 
 us not to omit. I am not against discussion ; but I should be glad 
 if we could avoid expressing an opinion. I think Mr. Marten's Act 
 was not sufficient; for, though I admit the grievance of the Non- 
 conformists was not a great one, we must all feel sympathy for 
 those who desire that their remains shall be laid in death by the side 
 of those who were dear to them. If I were in order I should like 
 to move the previous question. 
 
 Canon Jeffreys — All the speeches I have heard, the notices of 
 motions and amendments which have been given, convince me that 
 the resolution proposed by Archdeacon Lear is the one the House 
 would do best to adopt. If we examine it a little more in detail, 
 we shall see why that will be the best course. As to the suggestion 
 of Archdeacon Allen, that we should say nothing, that is impossible. 
 It would be a wrong to history and to our duty in every way if we 
 gave no expression to our opinion, and therefore I do not think the 
 " previous question " will be accepted. Bishop Claughton called 
 the original motion exaggerated and untrue in several particulars, 
 but I cannot agree with him. In the first place, it says there is a 
 great difficulty: and that is true; but is there no way of sur- 
 mounting the difficulty but that proposed in the Bill in a country 
 like this, where wealth is unbounded? If the Government, instead 
 of putting aside Mr. Marten's Act, had used their influence and 
 power in its favour, they might have made it sufficiently effectual to 
 meet the case. It certainly is a difficulty which might be met and 
 mastered without doing away with those old landmarks which we 
 ought to preserve; and therefore it is our duty (without going to 
 the extreme point suggested by the Dean of Chichester, of hanging 
 the Throne on this Burials Bill) to express at some length our 
 opinion upon it. The motion does that in moderate terms. Bishop 
 Claughton objects to the phrase " indiscriminate use of our church- 
 yards;" but if the use be not indiscriminate there would be no 
 special point in the Bill at all. As it stands, the Bill makes every- 
 thing yield to the will of the relatives of the dead, or the " person 
 
Burials Bill.] LOWER HOUSE — Jone 3. 
 
 91 
 
 ordering the funeral," the only restriction being that the service 
 shall be " Christian and orderly." I still less see how the Bishop 
 can object to the word " indiscriminate," when he finds that the 
 use referred to is not confined to the old churchyards, but applies 
 to all public cemeteries whatever. That phrase, therefore, cannot 
 be said to be "exaggerated." It is nothing more than a true 
 description of the Bill. The last speaker but one (Canon Lowe) 
 introduced into the discussion the shortcomings of those who have 
 gone before us in the ministry. I hope the House will set its face 
 against abuse of our forefathers. They did their work in their own 
 way, and probably quite as well as we should have done it in their 
 day. I rather see symptoms which lead me to the conclusion that 
 we are degenerated from the faith of our forefathers. I, therefore, 
 enter a protest against the expression of Canon Lowe, that wc are 
 now undergoing punishment for what we have inherited from those 
 who have gone before us. The resolution says we see in the Bill 
 "(1) an invasion of settled rights, (2) a disturbance of landmarks, 
 and (3) an indirect attack upon the Christian faith." To show that 
 this is no exaggeration, let me remind the House of the resolution 
 passed by this House in February, 1879: — 
 
 " That the Lower House of Convocation of Canterbury is of opinion that 
 the Church cannot, without detriment to her spiritual character and without 
 breach of trust, consent to admit within her consecrated burial-grounds rites 
 other than her own." 
 
 I hope our resolution to-day will be in conformity with those three 
 expressions. With reference to " settled rights," their invasion by 
 this Bill is self-evident. For the rights referred to are not only such 
 as the Church has inherited — they are rights which have beeu con- 
 stituted in our own time. Is it nothing that those who have built 
 churches and given churchyards, enlarged churchyards with pur- 
 chases of land, or perhaps with grants of their own private property, 
 or of glebes — is it nothing that these new burial-grounds, acquired 
 under well-understood conditions, shall be open to everybody and 
 every service so that it be " Christian and orderly "? The Act con- 
 stituting cemeteries has, comparatively speaking, only just been 
 passed; but if it had been conceivable that it would so soon be abro- 
 gated, would people have spent their money unnecessarily by 
 building double chapels and by making other duplicate arrange- 
 ments in such cemeteries? Here there is an invasion of settled 
 rights which justifies the language of the resolution. Then, as to 
 " disturbance of landmarks," what is the logical sequence of this 
 Bill? It is that, having admitted strange services into the church- 
 yards, they will be allowed entrance into the churches. When the 
 church is not being used for the services of the Church of England, 
 there may be a succession of services according to every variety of 
 Dissent. Then, as to " an indirect attack on the Christian faith," we 
 must all have felt, when Mr. Sadler was speaking yesterday, that the 
 doctrine of the Resurrection of the Body might too readily be pur- 
 posely passed by in some of the interments contemplated. Canon 
 
92 
 
 LOWER HOUSE— Jl-ne 3. [Burials Bill. 
 
 Wilkinson's notice of motion shows again what reasonable fears 
 may be entertained on this bead of "indirect attack on the Christian 
 faith. Tbus, in all ways, I hope I have made it clear that the reso- 
 lution of Archdeacon Lear is neither exaggerated nor untrue in its 
 description of the Bill referred to, and that at the same time it is * 
 sufficient declaration of the mind of the House on the subject. We 
 cannot enter our solemn protest, as some seem to suggest, against 
 a mere Bill, which may exist to-day and be gone to-morrow. Tbe 
 resolution, therefore, ends with expressing a hope that the Bill may 
 be amended, and as such I hope that the House may adopt it, 
 
 Caxon Miles — I should not have risen in this debate, but, having 
 had a short conversation with my revered Diocesan, who is to 
 introduce an amendment to-night in the House of Lords, I wish to 
 state its substance. He said—" After the passing of this Bill, how 
 can I consecrate a churchyard or a cemetery when I no longer know 
 the purposes for which they may be used?" With his strong views, 
 and the strong views which the Church has always held as to 
 consecrated ground and the purposes for which such places are 
 consecrated, we must all feel that he has pointed out an Episcopal 
 grievance. We sit here as assessors of the Bishops, and we ought 
 to consider the position in which they are placed. The Bishop of 
 Lincoln has taken some trouble to ascertain how the system works 
 in Ireland, and he has been informed by the Archbishops of Dublin 
 and Armagh that the two countries are by no means in parallel 
 circumstances. There are there but two forms of Dissent from the 
 Church— the Presbyterian and the Roman Catholic— each of which 
 has its own Office for burials carried oti in the original grounds of 
 the Church; but they are of such a character as would enable us lo 
 give to them a certain amount of concurrence. But when there is 
 a great variety of forms of Dissent, as we have here, and it is 
 considered that the Secularists are sure to gain an entrance into 
 our churchyards, the Archbishops of Armagh and Dublin concur in 
 the view that the system will not work here as it does in Ireland. 
 There is one other grievance to which attention ought to be called. 
 I do not refer to the Nonconformists, or to our having to perform 
 the service in consecrated ground over certain bodies; but there 
 is the grievance of the politician. No man has more conscientious 
 scruples than he who holds the highest position in the Stale, 
 and no doubt he feels deeply the consequences of passing such 
 a Bill as this; but he is a politician, and I suppose he is obliged 
 to act in that way by the force of circumstances. When he was 
 in the trough of the wave he considered the Nonconformists as 
 the "backbone of the Liberal party," but on that wave he has 
 risen to the high position he holds at present. We cannot but 
 suppose, as a conscientious Churchman, that he must have scruples 
 at bringing in a Bill or supporting a sweeping alteration in tbe rights 
 of the Church held for so many generations; but as a politician be 
 must regard the matter in bis conscience in a different way to what 
 he feels as a Churchman. He proposes certain things to relieve the 
 
Burials Bill.] 
 
 LOWER HOUSE— June 3. 
 
 93 
 
 consciences of the Nonconformists, and how are they to be carried? 
 When the Bill gets into Committee objections will be raised to every 
 item, and, therefore, I do think that when .we are debating the 
 question on the eve of its second reading in the House of Lords wo 
 ought to stand firm to the principles lo which \vc are bound to 
 adhere, and let our prote st be heard in Parliament against this great 
 sacrifice of the rights of the Church to satisfy the exigencies of 
 political struggles. I sincerely hope the amendment of the Dean of 
 Chichester will be carried. 
 
 The Dean of Westminster — I wish to say a very few words on 
 this occasion. The speaker who last addressed the House referred 
 to political reasons which might have influenced certain high per- 
 sonages in their course in this matter. I do not say that there may 
 not have been political cii - cumstances which had some weight with 
 some of those personages; but I wish the House to remember that 
 this Bill is substantially the same as that which was introduced two 
 years ago and supported by the Lord Chancellor, the two Arch- 
 bishops, and many distinguished peers, in regard to whose conduct 
 no such consideration could then be urged; and this measure merely 
 carries out the same views. But besides that I venture for myself 
 and some others in this House to express my deep conviction that it 
 is not only as a political matter, but as a matter of Christian, 
 Catholic charity and wisdom, that such a measure is desirable and 
 necessary. I havo for years longed for something of this kind. I 
 hail it as the greatest boon the Government could confer on this 
 Church and country. When I consider how great doubts have been 
 felt as to whether all such interments in England are not already 
 permissible by law — when I remember that this is the only one of 
 the three kingdoms where such burials are not the rule — when I 
 have myself, as a Dissenter in Scotland, performed the Burial 
 Service in the Established churchyards of that country, and no 
 difficulty was raised by any one to my performance of that rite — 
 when in Ireland for the last two centuries this law has been 
 observed and no difficulty has arisen — I think it is now high time 
 we should adopt what every European country, except Spain and 
 Italy, has adopted. Wo ought to hail this measure with pleasure. 
 We ought to welcome back to our churchyards those who by their 
 own scruples, and by our own folly also, have been excluded from 
 them for so long a period. The various sacred associations which 
 attract Nonconformists to our churchyards are the very last associa- 
 tions we ought as Churchmen to despise — the very associations the 
 revival of which we should welcome in every possible way. They 
 are amongst the recognitions, involuntary perhaps, but not the less 
 real, that our churchyards are the national churchyards and our 
 Church the National Church. 
 
 Archdeacon Balston — I would draw attention to the way in 
 which this Bill attacks the principle of consecration, not only as to 
 things but as to the Clergy themselves. I hold that consecration is 
 an essential element of the faith — it is the life of our Christianity. 
 
94 LOWER HOUSE— June 3. [Burials Sill. 
 
 As Clergy we place great value on the fact of our having been 
 consecrated, or ordained, or set apart for God's service. It is a 
 solemn dedication of both things and men for God's use, and 
 whether or not all those who are so consecrated are worthy, that 
 does not at all impair the gift or lessen the great value we have 
 always attached to it. This Bill allows Clergymen to minister in 
 unconsecrated grounds, and it opens consecrated grounds to the 
 ministrations of those who are not consecrated. It thus strikes a 
 heavy blow at the value of consecration ; and we must, therefore, 
 expect that the grace of consecration may ere long be taken from 
 the Church. Without entering on the subject of justice or injustice, 
 or of giving relief to English subjects or citizens, we as Clergy are 
 boand to protest against this Bill, in so far as it is calculated to set 
 at nought the value of consecration, both as to ourselves and to our 
 churchyards. They are set apart for God's service, and without 
 attempting to explain in what way — for it is a matter of faith — 
 God's blessing has ever accompanied that holy rite. I trust, 
 therefore, the House will not hesitate to speak plainly on the subject. 
 
 Canon Gregory — I feel great responsibility rests on this House 
 with respect to the question now before us. We have not to con- 
 sider what effect our decision may have on the debate going on 
 elsewhere; but what effect our action will have on the Church at 
 large, and what are the views of the Church at large upon it. I 
 am one of those who look for reaction at no distant time. The 
 moderation of the Clergy will be much missed when they are 
 replaced by those who are less educated. Just as the violence of 
 the Puritans in the time of the Commonwealth brought about 
 reaction, so after a time the people will begin to remember that we 
 at least had definite views of truth, and a great feeling will arise 
 throughout the country in favour of the wisdom and moderation of 
 the Church of England, and of that definite truth they have ever 
 held and tried to set before the nation. Believing in this revival 
 throughout the country, I look forward to a future which, if some of 
 us are too old to see ourselves, will gladden our children. Let us, 
 then, consider what is our starting-point. I look upon ourselves as 
 the ministers of a Church which has a definite creed, a definite ritual, 
 and a definite idea. I do not think, with the Dean of Westminster, 
 that we and our opponents are viewing truth from different 
 sides, for they are contradictory views of the same thing. If 
 • what we hold and what we contend for is true, then the other 
 view must be false. We have to remember that this Bill will lead 
 to the introduction of strange people into our churches. There 
 will be A, who declares our Blessed Lord is God, B, who denies it, 
 and C, who says there is no God at all, let into our churches, and 
 what are we to do who are only guided by the truth as it is declared 
 by the Church? Do not let us be led away by a spurious charity, 
 for nothing can be more uncharitable or more cruel to our poor 
 people than to confuse their notions of the truth. It is our duty to try 
 and keep them in the narrow way, and on that account it is 
 
Burials Bill.} 
 
 LOWER HOUSE — June 3. 
 
 95 
 
 impossible for us to accept the general ideas of charity which the 
 Dean of Westminster has set before us. Archdeacon Allen, on the 
 other hand, sajs we are to do nothing, as that would be the most 
 dignified course to take. If so, what are we assembled here for? 
 Are we not here to consider what advice we can best give the 
 Church of England at this juncture? and if at a great crisis we 
 say nothing we place ourselves in an unenviable position before 
 the nation. Of the two I would far rather go with the Dean of 
 Westminster than adopt the course which Archdeacon Allen 
 suggests. It would be simply abdicating our own functions. 
 Then we have to consider the effect of this measure on certain 
 endowments. I believe that endowments for sacred purposes are 
 not less sacred when they are vested in a corporation than in a 
 private person. If a pious donor gives one part of his property to 
 God's service and another part to the endowment of some special 
 object of charity, they are as much sacred as the rest of the 
 property which passes into private hands, and may be spent in 
 self-indulgence and vice. We lower the tenure of property when 
 we say we will pay all respect to private property, but are perfectly 
 free to deal with endowed property. Doctrines of this sort do not 
 tend to public morality, and are not good in any way whatever. 
 If there is a disposition to touch private property, people at once are 
 banded together in its defence; but, if the attack is upon trusts, the 
 same people will band themselves together and support the attack, 
 because they think it may in some way benefit themselves — they 
 may be benefited and nobody in particular will be injured. Most of 
 our churchyards have been given to us by pious people generations 
 ago, for, whether reformed or unreformed, we look upon it as the 
 same Church, and it will be a great and grievous wrong to have that 
 property taken from us. We are at any rate landed in a position 
 which, as regards Church and corporate property, will in the future 
 lead to great difficulty and regret. In many ways, however, the 
 Bill shows far more respect for the Church than it might have done. 
 The freehold of the churchyard is not placed in fresh hands; it is 
 still under the control of the Clergy; and I feel thankful, when so 
 much more might have been taken, that so much is left. I feel 
 thankful for the recognition in the Bill of an alternative service at 
 funerals. We have always held it to be one of our greatest hard- 
 ships to have to read our service over those who are unworthy, and 
 we shall in future be allowed to exercise a sufficient discipline so 
 as to decline to use those high words of hope and thankfulness at 
 the graves of people for whom they are not appropriate. When we 
 were discussing the subject of that alternative service some would 
 have wished that its use had been less restricted, and many would 
 now like in this Bill to add after the words " when requested by the 
 friends of the deceased," the words, " or by desire of the Bishop of 
 the diocese." But I do not think that would place us in a better 
 position. The possibility of an alternative service or a burial without 
 a service at all is a great relief, and I only hope that as they have 
 
96 
 
 LOWER HOUSE— June 3. 
 
 [Burials Bill. 
 
 taken so much from us they will not in Committee eliminate that 
 small amount of benefit from the measure. Viewing the Bill from 
 this standpoint, what is the wisest course for Convocation to pursue? 
 We should, I think, make a protest, short, earnest, dignified, and 
 without reasons. It is not for us to argue with the lord of thirty- 
 legions, and we cannot do more than protest. That will place on the 
 page of history a z-ecord that the Clergy of our generation were not 
 unmindful of their duty of protecting the rights of the Church. I 
 wish to avoid all exasperation; I wish to show that we recognise in 
 the course taken by the framers of this Bill a real desire to help the 
 Church, and that wo do not wish to cast any slur upon or impute 
 any unworthy motives to individuals. The resolution of Archdeacon 
 Lear is too long, and has too much argament. There is a great deal 
 more to be said in favour of that of the Dean of Chichester, but 
 there is too much sting in its tail. It would, therefore, be far better 
 to take that of Archdeacon Deuison, which is wisely conceived and 
 moderately expressed. 
 
 Canon Vaughan — I confess that I very much prefer the original 
 motion to the amendment, for it distinctly recognises the fact that 
 there is a very great difficulty connected with the present state of 
 the burial laws. To my mind it is necessary that we should acknow- 
 ledge that difficulty if we would do justice to our opponents or even 
 to our own views. I am glad, then, that the resolution acquits the 
 Government of having offered the Church a wanton affront. In 
 truth, it is not this Ministry alone that has felt the difficulty, for 
 that difficulty is one of long standing. No doubt much of it is of a 
 factitious character and has arisen from political agitation; but 
 some of it is due to the very nature of the case. It should be 
 remembered that the law which we are endeavouring to maintain 
 in this part of the United Kingdom does not exist in the other 
 parts, and in many foreign countries. When, then, we come to 
 look calmly at the question we can hardly avoid seeing that there 
 must be some change. There is scarcely a member of this House, 
 if he has had much parochial experience, but must have met with 
 such cases as that of an infant whose parents were Churchpeople, 
 and who fully intended to bring it to the font, dying, as it were by 
 accident, unbaptised. The parents would be almost heartbroken, 
 but the child could not be buried with the service. Such a case 
 lately happened in my own parish, where a child had unfortunately 
 been overlain. In that case I ventured to break the law, and to 
 offer prayer at the grave. I should think that most Clergymen 
 would have done the same. In another case I asked a woman at the 
 very point of death a very solemn question, and she told me what 
 was absolutely untrue. Yet, by the law, such a person must bo 
 buried with the full words of Christian hope. This is a question 
 upon which the laity have a strong right to be heard; but it is 
 one upon which I am afraid the clerical and the lay mind have 
 drifted apart. According to the lay view, the first thing to be 
 considered is the feelings of the mourning family ; and it is that 
 
Burials Bill] 
 
 LOWER HOUSE— June 3. 
 
 97 
 
 which is the strength of the promoters of the Burials Bill in 
 Parliament, and especially in the House of Lords. At the same 
 time, I go a long way with those who think the proposed solution 
 of the question unsatisfactory. I disapprove exceedingly of that part 
 of the Bill which relates to the cemeteries— it is wantonly and 
 unnecessarily offensive. I also disapprove of that part of it which 
 is founded upon the previous action of Convocation, and which I 
 cannot conceive has any chance of passing the House of Commons. 
 I do not believe the laity would ever tolerate the idea of a Clergy- 
 man sitting in judgment upon his dead parishioners, and assigning 
 a first-class service to this, or a second-class funeral to that. 
 Besides, the redemption which our Saviour has purchased with His 
 Blood is a universal one, and no human being ought to be excluded 
 from the possibility of hope. 
 
 Archdeacon Denison — In compliance with the wishes of several 
 members of the House, I may say that when I can I intend to 
 propose as a rider the resolution I proposed the other evening, 
 with respect to the Address, but which I then abstained from 
 pressing. It is as follows: — 
 
 " That the Convocation of Canterbury are bound by their duty to the Church 
 humbly to record upon this occasion the expression of their deep regret that 
 it should be judged necessary on the part of your Majesty's advisers to propose 
 to Parliament a measure which, if it should become law, will, for the first time 
 in the history of this country, take away from the Church of England the 
 exclusive control, according to her own doctrine and discipline, of the use of 
 ler own churchyards." 
 
 That paragraph seems to me to fulfil all the conditions that are 
 iesirable or prudent on such an occasion — it confines itself to facts; 
 it avoids the use of every word that could be considered harsh; 
 md it is as brief as it well could be. It has, however, been 
 jointed out to me that when I state that for the first time in the 
 listory of this country the churchyards would be taken from the 
 lontrol of the Clergy I am not quite accurate, because the thing 
 las been done once before — in the time of the Commonwealth. I, 
 ;herefore, propose, when I make the motion, to insert that excep- 
 ion, which I think will give it additional point. A great deal 
 las been said about injustice to the Clergy, but I do not wish 
 o dwell upon that. The Clergy are ready to bear any hardship 
 o which they may be subjected; but this is a question, not of 
 njustice to the Clergy, but of injury to the Church, and that we 
 ,re bound to resist by all the means which God has put in our hands. 
 Archdeacon Earle— I demur to the parallel which has been 
 rawn between the consecration of churchyards and the Clergy as 
 onsecrated Priests. It seems by no means healthy or desirable to 
 >ut the question in that manner. Instead of coming down to us, as 
 he consecration of the Christian ministry does, from the very 
 eginuiug, the consecration of churchyards is a comparatively 
 lodern thing. If I recollect aright, St. Gregory the Great spoke 
 f churchyards as in no sense consecrated, except for the conveni- 
 nce of those who wished to offer prayer over the graves of the dead. 
 
 H 
 
98 
 
 LOWER HOUSE — June 3. 
 
 [Burials Bill. 
 
 It Las, moreover, been held that burial itself is cousecration, and in 
 England it has been found necessary to restrict burials to church- 
 yards, because persons were interred at a considerable distance from 
 the church, and then the Clergy claimed the land as glebe, or, at all 
 events, as a burial-ground. Besides, the chaplains of her Majesty's 
 navy are constantly obliged to bury the dead in unconsecrated 
 ground. Again, there is no Consecration Service in the Book of 
 Common Prayer, and the service that is actually used has no 
 authority but that which has arisen from usage. 
 
 Canon Perry— The churchyard was always considered to have 
 right of sanctuary, a fact which seems to be indirect evidence of con- 
 secration at all events in the middle ages. 
 
 The Dean of Lincoln — I can hardly see how that is the case, 
 for it is in their character of ecclesiastical property that churchyards 
 possessed the right of sanctuary; and there were many places 
 which possessed that right where there is not, and never has been, 
 a church. For instance, a miserable plot of land in the neigh- 
 bourhood of my former parish (Ware) was an old sanctuary, 
 though there had never been a church there or anything of the 
 kind. Besides, I would ask how it is, if we are to consider the 
 dedication of a chui'chyard for the reception of the dead a spiritual 
 act, that there is no service for it in the Prayer-book? There is 
 nothing that makes a churchyard a churchyard but the conveyance 
 which the Bishop signs. Of course it is natural that the Bishop 
 should connect the signing of it with a religious service, but that 
 service does not constitute a consecration in the sense in which the 
 word has been used, or in the sense in which conseci-ation makes a 
 Bishop, or ordination a Priest. The House should consider that we 
 have in this country nearer two than one thousand miles of coast, 
 and that scarcely a day passes when some dead body is not cast 
 ashore. That dead body has by law to be buried in the church- 
 yard of the parish in which it is found. Again, it is well known 
 that many ships are partially manned by Malays, by Chinese, or by 
 sailors of other nationalities. A wreck takes place, and the bodies 
 of these persons, who are presumably not Christians, have never- 
 theless to be buried in our churchyards. It appears to me that we 
 ought to have a rule which would apply not only to seaboard but 
 to inland parishes, where half the inhabitants might be Dissenters. 
 
 Archdeacon Harrison — I feel inclined to vote for Dean Burgon's 
 motion. Canon Gregory seems disposed to be thankful for small 
 mercies; for it appears to me that the Bill is as dangerous and goes 
 almost as far as any measure of the kind could possibly do. More- 
 over, its real author, Mr. Osborne Morgan, has been marked for 
 preferment by the Government. I, therefore, cannot admit of the 
 plea of necessity. When the law of marriage and registration was 
 altered the Dissenters never thought of asking for any alteration of 
 the law of burials. And why? Because they did not regard it as 
 a grievance. They had in Bunhill-fields a great Nonconformist 
 
Burials Bill] 
 
 LOWER HOUSE— June 3. 
 
 99 
 
 cemetery, and there were chapels with graveyards in every part of 
 the country. Since then the grievance has been still further 
 diminished, and in Mr. Marten's Act a complete remedy was 
 provided. What is now proposed is not that persons who prefer it 
 should be allowed to have consecrated ground, but that those who 
 take the other view should have all our consecrated ground uncou- 
 secrated again. As for the provisions respecting orderly services, 
 though they have found a place in the Bill they will assuredly find 
 no place in the Act. 
 
 Canon Bernard — As one who for many years has felt tho 
 wisdom and tho righteousness of the course which has been taken, I 
 lament that it should be necessary ; aud I do not think that the 
 amendment of Archdeacon Denison goes much further than that. 
 
 Archdeacon Emery — After the explanation just given of it, 
 Ai'chdeacon Denison's motion will give a very uncertain sound, and 
 1 should greatly prefer the Dean of Chichester's. 
 
 The Prolocutor — The House will only be bound by the words of 
 its resolutions. 
 
 Canon Hopkins — I am thankful to have lived to read a speech 
 like that of the Lord Chancellor, and to know that it was made by 
 one whose loyalty and attachment to the Church of England 
 cannot be called in question. At the same time, I cannot read 
 portions of the Bill without shuddering. I should therefore be 
 willing to vote for Archdeacon Denison's motion if he would insert 
 words acknowledging the difficulty in which the Government was 
 placed. 
 
 The House then divided on the Dean of Chichester's amendment, 
 which it rejected by 40 to 33. 
 
 The Rev. P. Constable Ellis, with the consent of the House, 
 withdrew the motion of which he had given notice. 
 
 Archdeacon Denison — I now propose the rider I spoke of just 
 now. It will, with a slight addition which gives it additional point, 
 stand as follows: — 
 
 " That the Lower House of the Convocation of Canterbury are bound by 
 their duty to the Church humbly to record the expression of their deep regret 
 that it should be judged necessary on the part of her Majesty's advisers to 
 propose to Parliament a measure which, if it shall become law, will, for the 
 first time in the history of this country, save only and except the time of the 
 Commonwealth, take away from the Church of England tho exclusive control, 
 according to her own doctrine and discipline, of the use of her own churchyards." 
 
 Canon Gregory — I second the motion. 
 
 Canon Hopkins — I move to prefix to it the words — 
 
 " While acknowledging the great practical difficulty of providing, with a due 
 regard to the claims of religion, for the interment of the dead." 
 
 Archdeacon Denison — I have no objection to the proposal. 
 
 The Dean of Chichester — I hope that those words will not be 
 accepted. The Archdeacon's proposal was weak enough as it stood, 
 but with this preamble it will be the most "forcible feeble" pro- 
 duction I ever knew. This is no question of Dissenters' grievances ; 
 
 H 2 
 
100 
 
 LOWER HOUSE— June 3. [Burials Bill. 
 
 it is only the demand of a political faction, and I believe that nine 
 hundred and fifty Dissenters out of a thousand would prefer to come 
 to the parish church for the interment of their dead. 
 
 Canon - Gregory — I need only appeal to the well-known character 
 of Archdeacon Denison, and ask whether it is likely that he would 
 propose anything weak? The difference between the two motions is 
 simply the difference between loud barking and hard biting. 
 
 Archdeacon Denison — I suppose it is the weakness of age if 
 my words are feeble, but I am thankful to find that there are those 
 in this House who wish to say stronger things than I do. 
 
 Canon Rawlinson— I thought it wonderful that the Archdeacon 
 should have consented to anything so weak, and trust it will be 
 rejected. 
 
 The amendment was accordingly negatived, and Archdeacon 
 Denison's motion was carried by 59 to 7. 
 
 Canon Wilkinson then moved the rider of which he had given 
 notice, as follows : — 
 
 " That this House especially desires by its solemn protest to deliver itself of 
 all responsibility as to any dishonour which may be done to Almighty God by 
 the character of the worship which, in the event of the passing of this Bill, may 
 hereafter bo offered in our churchyards." 
 
 He said — I hope the House will without any scruple desire me to sit 
 down at any moment they think desirable for the greater good we 
 all to-night have at heart. I should be satisfied with having read 
 the rider, for I am sure it will command your sympathy, and, unless 
 I am mistaken, will be almost unanimously adopted. I am thankful 
 that in this debate it has gone out to the world that the Church of 
 England, as represented in this House of Convocation, has striven 
 to abide by the law of charity. Apart from the high position and 
 the Churchmanship of him by whom the Bill has been introduced 
 in the House of Lords, we recognise the fact that it is our duty, as 
 Christian men, to allow no thought of evil to harbour in our minds, 
 and to credit those from whom we differ with the same purity of 
 motive as we should wish to be ascribed to ourselves. I have no 
 desire to occupy the time of the House with any detailed criticism 
 on the Bill, for that has been offered by many more able than myself; 
 but I see many difficulties which will, I fear, arise. I fear that the 
 Clergyman will be put in an invidious position. He will be obliged 
 to allow the poor people in these country parishes to imagine that 
 he cares not for any words spoken unworthy of the worship offered 
 to God within the sacred precincts, for they will not stand forward 
 in the front of the parish sympathising with him as a public pro- 
 secutor — prosecuting under invidious circumstances those who have 
 been laying their dead in the silent grave. There are other difficulties 
 which, I fear, will arise; but, instead of dwelling upon them, I would 
 rather direct the attention of the House to that which was brought 
 before us. It was said that there was a widening of the gulf 
 between the Laity and the Clergy of England on this subject. It is 
 
Burials Bill.'] 
 
 LOWER HOUSE— June 3. 
 
 101 
 
 not for me to decide whether these words are true or not; hut, if 
 they were entirely true, I would venture to ascribe it to this fact — 
 that for a time the exigencies of political warfare gave too great a 
 prominence on public platforms to the rights of the Clergy which 
 it is supposed have been created by this or other Burials Bills 
 brought into the House of Commons or the Lords. We have taught 
 the laity — thank God for it ! — that it is obedience to Christian chnrity 
 to part with anything if it be for the good of the world — after the 
 example of Him Who laid down His life to redeem the world. We 
 have also taught the laity that it is not beyond the power of spiritual 
 life to take cheerfully the spoiling of our goods, arid to commit out- 
 cause to Him Who judgeth rightly. But I have never found this 
 argument fail with any layman, when it has been put before him 
 calmly — that we do recognise the practical difficulties of tho 
 question; that we do earnestly desire to rid every one of the 
 Dissenters of any single grievance that he may feel, even if it be 
 but an isolated case; for the agitation, I believe, has given a very 
 exaggerated notion to the country of the character of the grievance. 
 If there be but one single instance in which the Church has caused 
 a grievance to the Dissenters, she will be thankful to remove that 
 difficulty by any sacrifice in her power. But when we put before a 
 layman calmly that we do honestly owe a responsibility, higher than 
 our duty to man, to our God, by Whom we have been ordained; 
 when wo say we see something underlying that solemn service of 
 ordination, when the words "Take thou authority " are solemnly 
 and earnestly reiterated in our hearing; and when we say it even 
 to prejudiced laymen, and also to young Churchmen, who, thank 
 God! are rapidly increasing — when we say to these men who arc 
 asking for leadership, and puzzled as to the arguments brought 
 against them on every side; when we say to such men that we do 
 believe there is a responsibility that the Church — the witness for 
 her absent Lord — owes to His Father and our Father as to the 
 character of the worship— and I would go further than that and 
 say, as to the persons by whom that worship is offered to His high 
 and holy Throne — that she is responsible, being united to her Lord, 
 for the worship that is offered to His Father and our Father — then, 
 sir, I have never failed to find, although there may be the widest 
 divergence of opinion, respect for a body of Clergy who, with pain 
 and sorrow, are constrained to look first at the responsibility which 
 they owe to the God Whom they are called to worship, that 
 God about Whose worship they are solemnly ordained to instruct 
 their people. What may be the result of this Bill, if it bo 
 carried into law, I have no means of knowing. Far be it from 
 me to be a prophet of evil, but I confess that I did not attach 
 much weight to the latter portion of the argument of tho Dean of 
 Westminster, however heartily I might agree with his plea on behalf 
 of charity. Unless I am mistaken, whilst outside there is an 
 apparent love of the Church, there is growing up in the young a 
 quiet, settled hatred, and in many minds an intolerance of faith. 
 
102 
 
 LOWER HOUSE— June 3. IBuriahBxV. 
 
 And I think if we consider the rapidity with which opinions take 
 shape and form in the present day, he would be but a very superficial 
 student of the signs of his age who dared to prophesy that the time 
 may not soon come when prophets of unbelief may feel bound, in the 
 very sincerity of their convictions, openly to attack what they regard 
 as the stronghold of superstition in the old churchyards of England. 
 
 Archdeacon Chapman — I second the proposal of my dear friend. 
 I think I utter the sentiments of many among us when I express 
 my happiness in seeing the Canon in the House as a member of our 
 body. We hardly yet know what form the Bill will take in its 
 passage through the House of Lords. The Liberation Society con- 
 tends that there is a want of logic in the speech of the Lord 
 Chancellor in the House of Lords. His lordship, they say, laid it 
 down that every individual has a common-law right in the church- 
 yards, and they object to the limitation of their rights, as they 
 term them, and ask that another barrier should not be created. 
 Perhaps in the House of Commons another service may be in- 
 troduced, and, therefore, why should not Convocation beforehand 
 make its protest against all expressions of feelings and words which 
 might be against the truth of our Blessed Master? The Dean of 
 Westminster said that the feelings of persons around the dead 
 would be of such a character as to prevent any unseemly behaviour, 
 or words which might be regretted; but if we look to France and 
 remember what there took place in its great metropolis, we cannot 
 but know that when men's minds are inflamed they will utter words 
 of great bitterness and sorrow to others. In ancient times the same 
 old words were ever heard in the churchyards; but if this Bill be 
 passed, what words may we not hear to cause deep grief to those 
 who love God in Christ? 
 
 Archdeacon Denison — I take exception to the word " protest," 
 for although it is a protest in substance it is not in resolution. 
 
 Archdeacon Bathurst — I hope the word " protest " will be 
 retained, and that the House will come to no decision short of that 
 word. 
 
 The rider was then carried mm. con. 
 
 Archdeacon H. G. Randall — I now rise to propose a rider, which 
 was originally intended to apply to the Archdeacon of Sarutu's 
 motion, but it equally applies to that of the Archdeacon of Taunton. 
 It is as follows: — 
 
 " That, whilst this House solemnly protests against the passing of the said 
 Bill as subversive of the just rights of the members of the Church of England, 
 and detrimental to the interests of true religion, it humbly and earnestly prays 
 your Grace, if it should seem fit to you and our spiritual fathers the Bishops, to 
 call together the members of this House as early as possible, that they may 
 have full time to consult together upon the course which, in the event of the 
 Bill becoming law, it may be desirable to adopt, so as best to secure submission 
 to the law of the land, preserve peace amongst all Christian people, and promote 
 the welfare of our Church and nation." 
 
Burials Bill.'] 
 
 LOWER HOUSE — June 3. 
 
 103 
 
 I think some time is required to consider the question among our- 
 selves. There are various points connected with the Bill which arc 
 not really declaratory to the Clergy as to the course which they 
 should pursue, and that might tend to a great deal of general dis- 
 union. It is most important that we should concur so far as we 
 can upon the course which we shall have to adopt supposing the 
 Bill is carried, which, I confess, I look upon as a fait accompli. 
 There is no provision in tho Bill for the maintenance of church- 
 yards. Some of my most Liberal friends declare that they would 
 never allow the Bill to be used in their parishes, but if that were 
 done it would be regarded as an affront by the Nonconformists. 
 We ought, as far as we can, to submit to the law if the Bill should 
 pass. We ought to do what we possibly can to preserve peace and 
 harmony among all Christian people, and we ought to do our best 
 to promote the best interests of religion and the welfare of our 
 Church and nation. Therefore, I would ask the House humbly to 
 ask his Grace the President, if he sees fit, with the concurrence of 
 the Bishops, to afford an opportunity of consulting together upon 
 the matter, and that full time be given for such consultation. At a 
 meeting of the rural deanery of my archdeaconry a fortnight since 
 the question arose whether, in the event of the Bill being brought 
 in and passed, they ought to call together tho Clergy of their 
 different deaneries to consult together upon some uniform course of 
 action, and the matter was deferred on account of the early meeting 
 of Convocation, because they felt they would be guided in a great 
 measure by what might be the result of the deliberations of this 
 body. I do not think their requirements would be satisfied by our 
 simply contenting om*selves with protesting against the measure, 
 and giving them no guide by which they might arrange for their 
 future measures with regard to the carrying out of these enactments 
 of the Legislature. 
 
 Canon Gregoky — I would suggest whether, as a great number of 
 members of the House wish to consider the points in the Bill to 
 be brought before the House of Lords to-night, it would not be 
 better and more in order if the present motion were brought forward 
 to-morrow? 
 
 The Prolocutor — I was goiug to suggest somewhat the same 
 course. I do not think the House is a very convenient body to 
 prepare or suggest amendments or improvements, and I think it 
 would be better to put it into the hands of a Committee — to ask 
 his Grace the President to appoint a Committee on the subject — 
 supposing the Bill passed the second reading, which, however, may 
 not be. It is clear that the Bill would not for some time become 
 law, and we had better wait until the Bill is passed. 
 
 Archdeacon Randall — After what has been said, I am quite ready 
 to withdraw my proposal. 
 
 Canon Swainson — In order to carry into effect what has been 
 already done, I propose that the Prolocutor be requested to carry 
 our resolutions to the Upper House, 
 
104 
 
 LOWER HOUSE— June 3. 
 
 [Burials Bill. 
 
 Canon Lloyd — I second the proposal. 
 Agreed to. 
 
 The Bishop-Suffragan of Nottinguam pronounced the Benediction, 
 and the Prolocutor stated that he had received the directions of 
 his Grace the President to continue and prorogue the present sitting 
 of the House until the following day, Friday, June 4, to a certain 
 Upper Chamber, called the Board-room of the Bounty-office, 
 situate in Dean's Yard, Westminster, at eleven o'clock in the 
 forenoon. 
 
Business of > UPPER HOUSE— June 4. 
 
 Convocation. ) 
 
 105 
 
 Session VI.— Friday, June 4, 1880. 
 
 UPPER HOUSE. 
 
 The House met at eleven o'clock. His Grace the Archbishop 
 presided. There were also present the Bishops of London, 
 Winchester, Gloucester and Bristol, Llandaff, St. Alban's, Hereford, 
 Salisbury, Bath and Wells, Chichester, Oxford, Exeter, Truro, Ely, 
 and Lichfield. Prayers were read. 
 
 PETITIONS. 
 
 By the Bishops of Winchester and Ely — from places in the 
 diocese of Peterborough, in favour of an extension of the number of 
 Proctors. Several other petitions were presented in favour of an 
 increase in the number of Proctors. 
 
 BUSINESS OF CONVOCATION. 
 
 The Bishop of Exeter — I think it desirable to call attention to 
 the necessity of giving greater facilities for conducting the business 
 of Convocation ; and in doing so I cannot help instituting a com- 
 parison with the manner of conducting that business and the 
 manner in which the business is conducted when meetings of the 
 Bishops are summoned, and when we have an agenda placed before 
 us. That prevents the waste of time which frequently occurs here. 
 We now come together without any previous notice of what is to 
 be done, and the consequence is that nobody knows when any 
 subject is to be brought forward, and what is to be brought forward. 
 1, therefore, think it very desirable that some notice should bo 
 circulated before we meet. It is frequently said that we must wait 
 for what is done by the Lower House; but we might have an 
 agenda prepared, to be used at the discretion of the President. I 
 think it would not be very difficult to have a paper prepared and 
 sent round to your lordships, so that we might understand the 
 matters which are to be brought forward, and then we could be 
 prepared to deliberate upon them. I had no idea of the subjects to 
 be brought under consideration at the present sitting; but 1 think 
 there are matters which we ought to have an opportunity of 
 discussing; but in consequence of the want of any notice we have 
 been wasting a considerable time. Under present circumstances 
 there are members who think it almost unwise to come to Convoca- 
 tion any longer, because we do so little. I do not think there is much 
 in that objection, because I should come under any circumstances. 
 But I think that our work would be enormously lightened if we had 
 
106 UPPER HOUSE— JUNE 4. « Business of 
 
 \Convocation. 
 
 a paper sent round before we meet. I do not think there would be 
 any great difficulty in sending round an agenda stating the business 
 intended to be brought forward at your Grace's discretion. I do 
 not wish to move any resolution on the subject, but I hope your 
 Grace will consider the desirability, before the commencement of 
 our sittings, of sending oat a paper stating what business is 
 intended to be brought forward. 
 
 The President — I do not know what business could have been 
 put on the paper for this group of Sessions except the Address to 
 the Queen. 
 
 The Bishop of Exeter — There are certain matters which I think 
 might have been put on the notice — such as the resolutions and 
 Reports agreed to by the other House. It is worth while for this 
 House to consider several of them, and they might have been 
 mentioned on the notice-paper. 
 
 The Bishop of Llandaff — As an old member of Convocation, 
 under three Archbishops, I have heard this matter discussed over 
 and over again without leading to any practical result; but if it 
 could be accomplished, it would certainly be most desirable. I 
 think it would be of advantage to your lordships if, before coming 
 to the meeting, we had an opportunity given us of considering the 
 subjects which we should have to discuss, instead of spending so 
 much time in doing nothing. 
 
 The Bishop of St. Alban's — The Bishop of Peterborough has 
 for some time absented himself from these sittings, because he has 
 no certain knowledge of what business is to be transacted. If your 
 lordships could be assured of a programme of business it would 
 greatly help us. 
 
 The Bishop of Ely— I was a member for several years of the 
 Northern Convocation, and it was the custom there to issue an 
 agenda paper to the members at least a week prior to the meeting 
 of that body. Of course, there is one circumstance which makes it 
 more easy to do this in the Northern Province than in the Southern 
 — namely, that in the former the two Houses sit together. They 
 are not, therefore, liable to interruptions by business being brought 
 suddenly from one House to the other. It appears to me that 
 the suggestion of the Bishop of Exeter need not, however, prevent 
 interruption, at his Grace the President's pleasure, of what is on 
 the agenda paper, when either from ourselves or from the Lower 
 House anything springs up which is urgently important. If I 
 might venture to compare the proceedings of the Northern and 
 Southern Convocations, I would say that there is greater force 
 and concentration in the business of the former, since the persons 
 who come there know beforehand what are to be the subjects of 
 discussion. It enables them to "get up" those subjects to some 
 extent, so that when a member rises to speak he has not to feel his 
 way in discussing them. The Sessions of the Northern Province 
 
Business of ) UPPER HOUSE— June 4. 107 
 
 Convocation. ) 
 
 seldom exceed two clear days, and there is, consequently, no time 
 for letter-writing. I do not think that letters are ever written in 
 the Northern Convocation. 
 
 The President — You must not let our secrets go forth to the 
 whole world. Wo are supposed, at any rate, to be always engaged 
 on important business. 
 
 The Bishop of Ely — Speaking, then, from my own personal 
 experience, I would only urge that the effect of having an agenda 
 paper beforehand tends to produce much greater concentration of 
 thought and expression, and, in fact, to a more businesslike way of 
 doing the work of the Session, than when we come together 
 without knowing on what subjects we are to be invited to express an 
 opinion. 
 
 The President — What are the subjects which are to bo discussed 
 in the Northern Convocation at its next meeting? 
 
 The Bishop op Ely — I cannot say. 
 
 The Bishop of London — As an old member of the House, and junior 
 only to the Bishop of Llandaff, I may remark that this subject 
 has becu under our notice repeatedly. At one time it was taken 
 up by the late Bishop of Peterborough, who threatened to decline 
 to attend the meetings of the House unless first supplied with a 
 programme of the business to be done; but the endeavour broke 
 down in this way. To some extent the House was made acquainted 
 with what was to come before it, but suddenly the Lower House 
 would come up with papers requiring immediate attention, or some 
 one of your lordships would raise a question of the kind, so that it 
 rarely happened but that something else deemed more important 
 would be interposed, whilst the business we had come prepared to 
 enter upon was dropped. I fear that that would be generally found 
 to be the case. Still, I have no objection to make the trial. 
 
 The President — I do not see the slightest difficulty in a member 
 giving notice of any subject, and the notice being then sent round 
 to your lordships, as is done in the House of Lords, where, in con- 
 sequence of that notice, it is generally known what question is to be 
 discussed. On the present occasion, however, we have little to 
 discuss. Indeed, I never remember so barren a programme. On 
 former occasions the subjects to be considered were generally known 
 beforehand, but in this particular Convocation it is not so. The 
 action of the Upper House depends very much upon the proceedings 
 of the Lower House, and for two days there has been a discussion 
 in that House upon a document which emanated from this. Of 
 course, your lordships had to wait until that document came back 
 again. The result was that we had nothing particular to do, and 
 our meeting appeared to be a waste of time ; but if it is thought 
 desirable, when notice is given by any Bishop — say, a month before 
 the Sessions — that he wishes to bring forward a particular subject, 
 that that should be entered, as in the House of Lords, on the 
 
108 UPPER HOUSE— JUNE 4. ( Business of 
 
 I Convocation. 
 
 minute-paper, and that that minute-paper should be sent round to 
 the members of Convocation, I should be quite willing to concur. 
 At the same time, if subjects are taken up and discussed merely for 
 the sake of doing something, tho probability is that we should do 
 more harm than good. May I ask whether there is any subject 
 which any of your lordships wishes to bring forward now? 
 
 The Bishop of Winchester — There are a great many Reports 
 which, in the last Convocation, were brought up from the Lower 
 House and laid upon the table; but these Reports cannot be con- 
 sidered, because the Committees who reported have all, upon the 
 dissolution of that Convocation, come to an end, and there is now a 
 new Convocation. When these Committees have been reappointed, 
 their Reports will come before this House in due course. So that 
 there is business waiting to be dealt with, though we cannot enter 
 upon it this Session. If something like a programme were adopted 
 it would be a good thing, because we should not then be left with 
 nothing to do. 
 
 The President — That is why I asked if any of your lordships had 
 anything to bring forward now. 
 
 The Bishop of Truro — There is a society in my diocese for the 
 augmentation of small livings, and I wish to know what has become 
 of the Report from the other House on that subject? I have received 
 a letter from the Committee of the society in Cornwall respecting 
 it, to the following effect: — 
 
 On the presentation of the Second Report of the Committee on the Sale of 
 Advowsons and the Augmentation of Small Livings to the Lower House of 
 Convocation on the Hh July, 1879, the following resolution was passed unani- 
 mously : — " That the Upper House be requested to take such steps as in their 
 judgment are best suited to establish in each diocese in Kngland and Wales a 
 society having for its object the augmentation of the poor benefices in the 
 respective dioceses." Your lordship will recollect that we have in this diocese 
 a Committee appointed for the same purpose, and that last year we decided to 
 wait and see whether the Upper House would take action in accordance with 
 the prayer of the above resolution. 
 
 I am anxious to know what has become of that Report and reso- 
 lution, so that I may return an answer to the Committee, and they 
 may set the movement going again. I, too, agree that it would 
 be a great help to know, by means of an agenda paper, what 
 Reports and resolutions from the Lower House or other matters are 
 to be considered when Convocation meets. 
 
 The Bishop of London — There is the difficulty. Reports are 
 brought up suddenly and unexpectedly to interrupt the business on 
 
 the agenda. 
 
 The Bishop of Truro — But there is a considerable stock of 
 Reports already in existence. 
 
 The Bishop of London — They are from Committees of the last 
 Convocation, and that Convocation and its Committees are dead. 
 
New Form of \ UPPER HOUSE— JUNE 4. 109 
 
 Private l'rayer. ) 
 
 The President — That your lordships have so little to do now is 
 owing to the fact that this is the first Session of the new Convo- 
 cation, and that there has been no time to prepare such Reports. 
 
 The Bishop of Exeter — It is not only that we have nothing to do, 
 bat that we are not informed beforehand what (here is to do when 
 we have had a good deal of business to transact. It is possible, I 
 think, to send round before the meeting of Convocation a list of 
 such Reports or resolutions as are likely to be considered by the 
 other House; and although, from their having been before this 
 House in pi-cvious Sessions, your lordships have already heard some- 
 thing about them, it would certainly facilitate business to have a 
 reminder that such and such questions are to come before us. 
 There are many subjects the discussions upon which would be very 
 different if we only knew beforehand what was to be discussed. 
 
 The Bishop of Ely — In the Northern Province there is a 
 secretary of Convocation (Canon Trevor), who is himself a member 
 of the House. 
 
 The Bishop of Lichfield — I consider it strange that, in these 
 busy and active days of the Church, your lordships should have 
 been sitting here four days doing nothing, simply because the 
 Lower House has sent us nothing to discuss. 
 
 The President — If there is anything to be proposed, 1 should be 
 glad to hear it; but as we have been sitting here three days 
 without discussing anything I presume there is nothing to discuss. 
 Will any one have the kindness now to say what business he wishes 
 to bring forward? 
 
 NEW FORM OF PRIVATE PRAYER. 
 
 The Bishop of Llandaff — With your Grace's permission I wish 
 to revert to a subject which we discussed the other day, in order 
 that I may have the opportunity of publicly expressing an opinion 
 of my own upon a particular point connected with it. That opinion 
 I stated privately when the Bishops discussed the forms of prayer 
 which had been prepared by certain Committees of this and the 
 Lower House. But I desire to express it publicly. There are two 
 forms — one for Family Prayer and the other for Private Prayer. 
 The form for Family Prayer is done with. Some of us expressed 
 our dissatisfaction at the fact of the authority of Convocation 
 having been claimed for that book, and also of the disagreement 
 between the title-page and the Preface to it, one saying that the 
 book had the authority of Convocation and the other saying that 
 it had not. However, that is done with, and I do not wish to 
 bring the question up again. But there is another book, the Book 
 of Private Prayer. I alluded to it in the debate the other day, and 
 was told that it was only a book which had been prepared by a 
 Committee of the Lower House, and that there was no intention of 
 bringing it before this House. Therefore, strictly speaking, we 
 have nothing to do with it. But an article respecting it has 
 
110 UPPER HOUSE— June 4. $ New Form °f 
 
 I Private Prayer. 
 
 appeared this week in a paper -which is very generally circu- 
 lated among the Clergy, and, although that article very fairly 
 and honestly states that this Book of Private Prayer is 
 merely prepared by a Committee of Convocation of the Lower 
 House, yet it goes on to speak of it as if the Bishops were in 
 some way implicated in it, for it quotes from the book a par- 
 ticular prayer, and says that it conceives the Bishops cannot be 
 satisfied with that particular prayer. Therefore, indirectly, by that 
 article in the Guardian newspaper, we are made to a certain extent 
 responsible for this book. The particular passage which I wish to 
 refer to is from a prayer of Jeremy Taylor. It is a petition which 
 I could myself devoutly and properly put up, and no doubt others 
 could do the same ; but I feel convinced that a very dishonest use of 
 that passage from the prayer of Jeremy Taylor might be made, and 
 in all probability will be made, if this book is in any way sup- 
 posed to represent the opinion of the Bishops. The Bishops not 
 very long ago prepared a statement respecting what they thought 
 was the doctrine of Confession, as it concerned our Church; I 
 forget whether that paper was drawn up by this House and agreed 
 to by the Lower House, or only agreed to by the Bishops in private. 
 
 The Bishop of London — It was drawn up by the Bishops, and 
 agreed to by the Lower House. 
 
 The Bishop of Llandaff — That makes my case the stronger. In 
 that paper we stated what were our opinions on the subject of con- 
 fession, and it was intended to guard against certain views on private 
 confession which have been largely accepted by some of the Clergy. 
 The passage to which I objected was this — " Give me the oppor- 
 tunity of a prudent and spiritual guide and of receiving the Holy 
 Sacrament" — a prayer which in itself is extremely proper. But my 
 reason for objecting to it is this. It is a habit of controversialists 
 very frequently to support their opinions by catena;, and from these 
 passages false inferences are often deducted. Now, I am convinced 
 in my own mind that this passage is liable to that kind of abuse, 
 and in all probability will be abused for the purpose of supporting 
 those very views respecting confession which the paper drawn up by 
 this House and approved of by the other House was intended to 
 condemn ; and although we have nothing to do, strictly speaking, 
 with this book, yet inasmuch as it has gone forth with the appro- 
 bation of a Committee of the Lower House of Convocation, and 
 been publicly alluded to, and the names of the Bishops mentioned in 
 connection with and as approving or disapproving of it, I think it 
 my duty at any rate to relieve my conscience from all participation 
 in such an error, lest any persons should be found quoting this 
 passage in a catena, and saying — " Here we have Convocation itself 
 deliberately giving its sanction to this practice of confession which 
 we ourselves are exercising" (and which that paper has con- 
 demned) — " ' Give me the opportunity of a prudent and spiritual 
 guide and of receiving the Holy Sacrament.' " I repeat that I wish 
 to relieve my own conscience on the subject. 
 
Business of } 
 Convocation. ) 
 
 UPPER HOUSE — Jone 4. 
 
 Ill 
 
 BUSINESS OF CONVOCATION. 
 
 The President — Recurring to the question that lias previously 
 been under discussion, if it be your lordships' wish, a paper of 
 business shall be sent round to you. In the House of Lords tlio 
 practice is to give notice in the House itself. That is the legitimate 
 mode of proceeding, and I would suggest that notice should be 
 given at this group of Sessions of any subject which it is intended 
 to bring forward at the next. 
 
 The Bishop of Salisbury — But other subjects might arise between 
 the two. 
 
 The President — If any of your lordships write to me expressing 
 a desire that such-and-such a subject should be discussed, though 1 
 cannot pledge myself that it will be discussed, I will undertake to 
 give it consideration. 
 
 The Bishop of Ely — I would suggest that the notices might be 
 received to -within a fortnight of the meeting of Convocation. In 
 the Northern Province they are not more than sufficient to cover 
 the first page of a sheet of note-paper. 
 
 The Prolocutor and his Assessors being in attendance, 
 
 The President said — In reference to the document which was 
 handed in at our last meeting, headed " Resolution of the Lower 
 House, 3rd June, 1880," I am requested to make this statement to 
 you — that their lordships are in doubt whether any precedent exists 
 for the communication to the Upper House of a document such as 
 that now laid on the table embodying a certain protest not in the 
 form of a gravamen or an articulus clcri. Wo therefore desire the 
 Prolocutor to refer the matter to the Committee of Privileges, with 
 a request to search for precedents, which may be submitted to us. 
 
 Archdeacon Harrison — Perhaps I may be allowed, as Chairman 
 of the Committee of Privileges, to say that there is ample precedent 
 for individual protests to be presented to this House. There is the 
 case of Bishop Bull and others in the last century. Whether there 
 are any precedents for presenting the protest of the whole House is 
 another matter. 
 
 The Prolocutor and his Assessors then retired. 
 
 The schedule of prorogation was then read, by which the sitting 
 was prorogued to Tuesday, the 13th July. 
 
112 
 
 LOWER HOUSE— June 4. 
 
 [Burials Bill. 
 
 LOWER HOUSE. 
 
 The Very Rev. Loud Alwyne Compton, Dean of Worcester, Pro- 
 locutor, presided. 
 
 Prayers were said by the Prolocutor, the Prasconization of 
 Members was made by the Actuary, and the Minutes of the last 
 Session, having been read and confirmed, were ordered to be reduced 
 to Acts, according to the ancient practice of Convocation. 
 
 The Prolocutor named as his Assessors for the present Session 
 the Deans of Westminster and Chichester ; the Archdeacons of Maid- 
 stone, Middlesex, Taunton, Totnes, Stow, and Oakham; Canons 
 Rawlinson, Gregory, Sumner, Hopkins, Yard, and Sir F. Gore 
 Ouseley; Sub-Dean Clements; Prebendary Gibbs; and Sir J. E. 
 Philipps. 
 
 NOTICES OF MOTION. 
 
 Archdeacon Lear — That the following be an instruction to the 
 Burials Committee, if such Committee be appointed : — To use their 
 endeavours — (1) To prevent the operation of the Burial Laws 
 Amendment Bill of 1880 taking effect until July 1, 1881; (2) and 
 to prevent the operation of the Bill affecting those parishes in which 
 a burial-ground for Nonconformists is already provided ; (3) and to 
 exempt from the operations of this Bill those cemeteries in which 
 unconsecrated ground forms a part; (4) and to exempt from the 
 operations of the Bill cloisters or cathedral churchyards. 
 
 Chancellor Briscoe — That it is desirable that a clause to the 
 following effect be inserted in the Bill to Amend the Burial Laws, 
 viz. : — 
 
 That nothing in this Act contained shall hinder the framing of rules for the 
 regulation of graveyards formed after the passing of this Act, although such 
 rules may exclude from such graveyards all ministrations other than those of 
 the Established Church, and although such graveyards be consecrated. 
 
 BURIALS BILL. 
 
 Canon Barlow — I move that a Committee be appointed to report 
 on matters connected with the Burials Bill. 
 Archdeacon Lear — I second the motion. 
 
 The Prolocutor — This is a matter which we cannot settle for our- 
 selves. It rests a good deal with his Grace the President. I do 
 not, however, see any reason why this motion may not be put. 
 
 Agreed to unanimously. 
 
 The Dean of Chichester — If the motion of the Archdeacon of 
 Stafford is not accepted, I give notice that I shall move the follow- 
 ing resolution: — 
 
Burials Bill] 
 
 LOWER HOUSE— June 4. 
 
 113 
 
 " That this House cannot view with satisfaction the clauses in the Burials 
 Bill which propose to give the force of law to resolutions on matters concerning 
 the Church, which have received the approval of one only out of the two 
 Convocations of this country." 
 
 The Prolocutor, at a later period of the Session, said — His 
 Grace has agreed to the appointment of the Committee to consider 
 all matters which may arise with respect to the Burials Bill. I at 
 once nominate it as follows: — The Prolocutor; the Deans of St. 
 Paul's, Lichfield, Rochester, and Bangor; the Archdeacons of Middle- 
 sex, Brecon, Bristol, Colchester, Leicester, Lincoln, Bodmin, Sud- 
 bury, Sarum, Totnes, and Nottingham; Sub-Dean Clements; 
 Canons Gregory (convener), Barlow, Rawlinson, Lloyd, Wilkinson, 
 Hopkins, Sumner, Puckle, and Neville; Chancellor Briscoe; Pre- 
 bendaries Campion and Gibbs; and the Rev. C. R Knight. 
 
 HARVEST SERVICE. 
 
 Canon Hayward — I beg to move : — 
 
 " That it be an instruction to the Committee on Occasional Services to 
 provide, as soon as possible, a service for use on the Rogation Days, beseeching 
 God's blessing upon the crops of the earth, and the herds and flocks of the 
 field." 
 
 Archdeacon Palmer — I second the motion. 
 Agreed to. 
 
 expenses. 
 
 Canon Gregory moved, and Sub-Dean Clements seconded: — 
 
 " That it be referred to the Finance Committee to consider the question of 
 fees now payable by members of this House ; the amount payable ; the manner 
 of application of the sums so paid ; and whether any better plan can be 
 proposed for remunerating the officers who arc paid out of the fund so created." 
 
 DIOCESAN CONFERENCES. 
 
 Archdeacon Hessey — I beg to present the Report of the Com- 
 mittee on Diocesan Conferences, and to move that it be printed for 
 the use of Convocation. (See Appendix.) 
 
 Canon Gregory — I second the motion. 
 
 .Agreed to. 
 
 BURIALS BILL. 
 
 Archdeacon Iles — I rise, pursuant to the notice I gave yesterday, 
 to move that the Standing Orders be suspended, for the purpose of 
 discussing the present aspect of the Burials Bill. 
 
 Canon Neville — I second the motion. 
 
 The Prolocutor — To carry this suspension there must be a 
 majority of two-thirds. 
 
 A show of hands was then taken, when there appeared — For, 50 ; 
 against, 16; and the Standing Orders were accordingly suspended. 
 
 Archdeacon Iles — I do not rise for the purpose of reopening the 
 discussion upon the details of the Burials Bill, which has just been 
 
 l 
 
114 
 
 LOWER HOUSE— Joke 4. 
 
 [Burials Bill. 
 
 read a second time in the House of Lords, but to draw attention to 
 one or two very important points. It is well known that Convoca- 
 tion has already recommended some legislation on this subject. In 
 1879, under a Letter of Business from the Crown, the Rubrics 
 affecting the Burial Service were carefully considered, and several 
 alterations recommended. In the Burials Bill now before Parlia- 
 ment a clause is inserted (clause 11) the short title of which is " The 
 Relief of Clergy from Penalties in Certain Cases," in which it is 
 proposed that the officiating Clergyman should be allowed to act 
 according to those new Rubrics, which are appended in Schedule B 
 to the Bill, which of course, if the Bill passes, will then form part 
 of an Act of Parliament. To make my meaning clear I will read 
 the clause and the schedule: — 
 
 Relief of Clergy of Church of England from Penalties in Certain Cases. 
 
 11. And whereas the Archbishop, Bishops, and Clergy of the Province of 
 Canterbury, in Convocation assembled, in obedience to her Majesty's Boyal 
 Licence and Letter of Business, bearing date respectively the 4th and 6th days 
 of July, in the thirty-fourth year of her Majesty's reign, did, on the 31st day of 
 July, 1879, agree (among other matters by the said Letter of Business referred to 
 them) upon certain recommendations concerning the Office of the Church of 
 England for the Burial of the Dead, proposed by them to be embodied in 
 certain altered and additional Rubrics in the form set forth in Schedule (B) to 
 this Act annexed, and which recommendations were by them duly submitted 
 to her Majesty : And whereas the same recommendations (except that numbered 
 2 in the Schedule hereto) have also been agreed to, and submitted to her 
 Majesty, by the Archbishop, Bishops, and Clergy of the Province of York, in 
 Convocation assembled, in obedience to her Majesty's Boyal Licence and 
 Letter of Business in like manner addressed to them : It is hereby enacted 
 that, from and after the passing of this Act, no Minister in holy orders of 
 the Church of England shall be liable to any censure or penalty, ecclesiastical 
 or civil, for any act done or omitted to be done by him in or concerning 
 the burial of any deceased person in any churchyard, graveyard, or other 
 place, provided that such act or omission would have been authorised by the 
 recommendations set forth in the said Schedule (B) to this Act, if the same 
 had been embodied as Rubrics in the Office of the Church of England for the 
 Burial of the Dead, or any of them. 
 
 Schedule (B). 
 
 1. That the first Rubric of the Office for the Burial of the Dead stand as 
 follows : — 
 
 Here it is to be noted that neither the Office ensuing nor the shortened 
 Office hereinafter provided is to be used for any that die unbaptised or excom- 
 municate, or in the commission of any grievous crime, or having laid violent 
 hands upon themselves, have not been found to have been of unsound mind. 
 
 2. Add the following Rubric : — 
 
 Nevertheless in cases in which neither of the aforesaid Offices may be used, it 
 shall not be unlawful for the Minister, at the request of the kindred or friends 
 of the deceased, to use after the body has been laid into the earth prayers 
 taken from the Book of Common Prayer and portions of Holy Scripture, 
 approved by the Ordinary, so that they be not part of the Order for the 
 Burial of the Dead, nor of the Order of the Administration of the Holy 
 Communion. 
 
 3. In the Rubric, " after they are come into the church, shall be read 
 
 one or both of these Psalms following," 
 For "read " substitute " said or sung." 
 
Burials Bill.'] 
 
 LOWER HOUSE— June 4 
 
 115 
 
 4. At tho end of tho Burial Offico, after " The grace of our Lord," 4c., 
 add :— 
 
 If occasion require, tho words " Lord have mercy," &c, the Lord's Prayer, 
 tho prayer Almighty God, with Whom, Sfc, and the Collect following, may, at 
 tho discretion of the Minister, be said in the church after the Lesson. 
 
 5. f On the request or with the consent of the kindred or friends, it shall 
 be lawful for the Minister to use only tho following service at the burial : — 
 Tho three sentences of the Scripture to be said or sung on meeting tho 
 corpse at the entrance of tho churchyard ; and after they aro come into tho 
 church one or both of these Psalms following, Psalm xxxix. and Psalm xc. j 
 then tho Lesson, 1 Cor. xv. 20. 
 
 When they come to the grave, while the corpse is made ready to be laid into 
 the earth, the Priest shall say, or the Priest and clerks shall sing, the sentences 
 beginning, " Man that is born of," &c, ending with the words " fall from Thee," 
 Then shall follow tho words " Lord have mercy," &c, the Lord's Prayer, and 
 " The grace of our Lord." 
 
 6. % Whenever either of the two foregoing services be used it shall be lawful 
 for the officiating Minister, at his discretion, to allow the use of hymns and 
 anthems in the church or at the grave. 
 
 7. Further, it shall be lawful for the Minister, at the request or with the 
 consent in writing of the kindred or friends of the deceased, to permit the 
 corpse to bo committed to the grave without any service, hymn, anthem, or 
 address of any kind. 
 
 8. " Insert tho following Rubric at the end of the Order for the Burial of tho 
 Dead," viz. : — 
 
 T At the burial of tho dead at sea, instead of these words, " We therefore 
 commit his body to the ground, earth to earth," &c, say, " Wo thereforo 
 commit his body to the deep, to be turned into corruption, looking for the 
 resurrection of the body (when the sea shall give up her dead), and the life of 
 the world to come, tlirough our Lord Jesus Christ." 
 
 The House will see the object of the proposition I am about to make 
 if I at once state that I wish to leave out the opening words of para- 
 graph 5, so that it should commence " It shall be lawful ; " and in line 
 two of paragraph 5, to insert the word "shortened " before " service." 
 No doubt the permission which this Clause 11 gives to the Clergy 
 to use the shortened service or to omit the service altogether would 
 be a great boon if it were a reality, but I shall be able to show that 
 the expected relief would be illusory. It probably will be objected 
 that as those words were deliberately inserted by Convocation, there 
 would be a certain degree of inconsistency in now striking them 
 out. But those words were adopted under a very different state of 
 things to the present. We have arrived at a stage when liberty is 
 being given all round, and it is only reasonable that this restriction 
 should be removed. There are, as we all know, many cases in 
 which our grand old Burial Service ought not to be used, and if 
 liberty is to be given all round, and as the Bill itself professes to 
 give the Clergy this liberty, it ought to be real and not a delusion. 
 Our opponents have no objection; the Liberation Society itself has 
 said that the Clergy ought to have this liberty. The House of 
 Commons and this House have both said the same thing, and the 
 American Church has acted upon it. Nobody feels more strongly 
 that we cannot sufficiently honour and value the old Burial 
 Service of the Church of England, but it must be remembered that 
 
 1 2 
 
116 
 
 LOWER HOUSE — J one 4. 
 
 [Burials Bill. 
 
 it was made to be used by members of a Church which at that 
 time possessed a power of discipline. I feel the greatest charity 
 for persons so situated, and would not hurt the feelings ot 
 any one bringing their dead to be buried; but when right is con- 
 cerned, we must not give way too much to feelings of charity; and 
 if the use of the service would do real harm to the religious life 
 of the friends of those brought to be buried, it is no charity to con- 
 tinue that use. But if the Rubric stands as it is, the alternative 
 service never could and never would be used, because the consent of 
 kindred and friends must first be obtained. We all know how 
 touchy the poor are with respect to all matters about funerals, and 
 how anxious they are to honour their dead, so that if they were 
 asked to consent to the use of the shortened service they would 
 suspect something and ask the reason, and it' that reason were given, 
 not one family in a thousand would yield. Let my rev. brethren 
 ask themselves what they would think if a Clergyman came and 
 told them that their father, mother, child, or friend had lived so as 
 not to allow words of hope to be said over the grave? To expect a 
 person in pn agony of grief for the dead to consent to the shortened 
 service, because the departed one was not worthy of the old service, 
 is not in the nature of things. Even in the case of ungodly persons 
 how gladly near and dear relatives cling to the last straw of hope 
 with regard to the future life, and to give up every expression of 
 hope when at the grave-side is more than human nature could do. 
 If, then, these words were omitted from the Rubric, the relief 
 granted would be real. As it stands, Clergymen would not ask 
 for consent, and, if they did, it would not be granted once in a 
 thousand times. 
 
 The Prolocutor — I wish to point out that Schedule B is 
 an actual copy of what has been done by Convocation and sub- 
 mitted to the Crown. You may ask for the clause and the 
 schedule to be struck out; but I do not see how you can alter the 
 latter. 
 
 Archdeacon Iles — If the House agrees with the Prolocutor there 
 is an end of the matter; but the new Rubrics are not established 
 by Canon or Statute. It only amounts to this — the Lord Chancellor 
 has simply taken our words and put them into his Bill. Surely it 
 is open to us to change our minds ! 
 
 The Prolocutor — Oh, certainly, we may change our minds. 
 
 Archdeacon Iles — If the alternative service could be freely had it 
 would very soon supersede the regular use of the old one, which 
 would then practically be reserved for communicants and those dead 
 whom it is especially wished to mark with respect. The idea of the 
 Clergyman being constituted the judge of the deceased would fade 
 away, or at least he would cease to be a judge of bad men, and 
 remain only a judge of good men. In fact, it would be no longer a 
 matter of judgment, but one of feeling. I hope the House will 
 
Burials Bill.] 
 
 LOWER HOUSE— June 4. 
 
 11? 
 
 remember that there are two great things which the Clergy ought 
 to carry out in burying the dead — obedience and honesty. Even a 
 member of this House allowed yesterday that on a particular 
 occasion he had been weak enough to give way and omit 
 words, and in large parishes the Clergy are, I fear, often 
 obliged to break the law as it now stands. It might be said, " Why 
 not put in an appeal to the Bishop ? " but I do not wish to bring the 
 Bishop into these matters. It is not a question between a man and 
 his Bishop, but a question between a man and his parishioners. I, 
 therefore, trust that tbe House will adopt my motion, and, if the 
 words I object to are eliminated from the Burials Bill, it would 
 allow every Clergyman to yield a perfect obedience to the law and 
 his own honest convictions. 
 
 Archdeacon Denison — I hope the Clergy will not fix their minds 
 too much on the idea of relief, because the Lord Chancellor 
 stated in the House of Lords that the words "grievous crime" 
 would be restricted to whatever definition the law put upon 
 them; and with regard to the words "immorality and noto- 
 riously evil living," it is not intended to give the Clergy any liberty 
 at all. 
 
 Canon Rawlinson — 1 cannot agree with the motion. The clause 
 simply recites what has been done by Convocation, and to cut out 
 certain words in the schedule, as proposed, would be making the 
 clause state a falsehood. We, therefore, cannot ask for that. I 
 admit the importance of the objection, but hope that some other 
 mode of meeting it will be discovered. 
 
 Arciideacon Palmer — My hands are now untied, and I am free to 
 discuss what is good to put in the Bill, and what would not be 
 desirable to introduce into it. I wish to deliver my soul on this 
 very important point, on which I have the misfortune to differ from 
 the Archdeacon of Stafford. From what has been said by Canon 
 Rawlinson, the proposal before us is plainly and absolutely 
 inadmissible. We cannot ask to alter the schedule referred to in 
 the clause, because that is a faithful transcript of what has been 
 passed by this Convocation — carried by large majorities, and 
 presented to the Crown in 1879. I agree with the writer in the 
 Times of Monday in deprecating all legislative reference whatever 
 to Convocation, and especially because I do not wish to put a weapon 
 of great strength into the hands of those who are not the friends of 
 Convocation or of the Church of England. I wish, however, to 
 express my dissent from the substance of the motion. The Arch- 
 deacon of Stafford desires to ask for the Clergy power to substitute 
 the shortened form of Burial Service for the longer at their own 
 discretion, without obtaining the consent of the kindred or friends of 
 the deceased. For my part, I am so far from desiring such a power 
 for the Clergy, that, speaking as a Priest of the Church of England, 
 I should deprecate the boon most earnestly if it were offered me. I 
 do not say this from any fear of lay opinion inside or outside the 
 
118 
 
 LOWER HOUSE— June 4. [Burials Bill. 
 
 Church. In my judgment it is the true policy of the Clergy to ask 
 again and again, if necessary, for such things as seem to them just 
 and reasonable. Such persistence will prevail in the end, if the 
 things sought are really reasonable, however stubborn may 
 be the prejudices by which they are at first encountered. 
 But in this instance the thing asked for appears to me 
 unreasonable in itself and eminently undesirable for those 
 who ask it. The restoration of discipline inter vivos is, to 
 my mind, in the language of the Commination Office, a thing 
 " much to be wished," however little to be expected. But, 
 as a Priest of the Church of England, I shudder at the thought 
 of being called upon to sit in judgment on the dead, and determine 
 whether this or that parishioner had deserved this or that form of 
 burial. Such a discretion as the motion asks for would be an 
 intolerable burden to Clergy of tender conscience, and would breed 
 endless quarrels between them and their parishioners. The Arch- 
 deacon of Stafford seems to think that the shortened form of service 
 would never come into use, if the consent of the kindred or friends 
 of the deceased be a necessary condition of its employment. I 
 cannot agree in that opinion. Its use would, doubtless, be rare; but 
 it is a provision intended to meet exceptional cases. There are 
 cases in which burial with the full service of the Church of England 
 is not only painful to the Clergyman who officiates, but scandalous 
 in the eyes of others. In such cases I think it not unlikely that 
 friends and relations would willingty consent to a course which would 
 avert public scandal. At the same time I admit freely that this pro- 
 vision would not always save the parish Priest from distress and 
 difficulty. There would remain cases in which he would feel the 
 full service to be painfully inappropriate, and yet could not obtain 
 the consent of the kindred or friends of the deceased to its curtail- 
 ment. In such cases he would be just where he is now — neither 
 worse off nor better; but their number would not, I think, be 
 lessened if this provision became law. For myself, I feel bound to 
 add that the only effectual way of meeting the difficulty and giving 
 complete relief to the parish Priest is the modification — mutilation, 
 if any one chooses to call it so — as it has been done in America, of 
 the ordinary Burial Service, by omitting the words of hope and of 
 thanksgiving for " the removal of this our brother out of the miseries 
 of this sinful life." That is what people would most regret the loss 
 of ; but thus, and thus only, would all cause of stumbling be removed. 
 Convocation has not recommended this course; and I, for one, 
 am disposed to accept thankfully, as the next best thing, the course 
 which it has recommended, and which the Bill now before Parlia- 
 ment proposes to legalise. 
 
 Pkebendart Sadler — The Bill takes away all power from the 
 Clergyman, and under its provisions the real authorities in the 
 churchyard will be the relatives of the deceased. They will be the 
 permanent authority, and able to call in any person whatever to read 
 any service whatever. 
 
Burials Bill.] 
 
 LOWER HOUSE— Jone 4. 
 
 119 
 
 Archdeacon Earle — I move that the subject be referred to the 
 Committee just appointed on the Burials question. 
 
 The Rev. C. R. Knight — I second the motion. 
 
 Canon Gregory — A broad principle has been raised — viz., to 
 what extent we are competent to petition against what we ourselves 
 have done. I do not like the idea of doing that, but it would help us 
 somewhat out of the difficulty if we were to insert these words — " or 
 by direction of the Bishop of the diocese." We should then have 
 some one to appeal to in flagrant cases, and so far would be placed 
 in a much better position. I trust the Bill will work out better than 
 our hopes, and I should, therefore, advise my venerable friend to 
 consent to the motion just made. 
 
 Archdeacon Iles consented, and the subject was accordingly 
 referred to Committee. 
 
 The Prolocutor — I presume Canon Rawlinson, whose motion 
 was based upon that of the Archdeacon of Stafford, will agree to the 
 same course respecting it. 
 
 Canon Rawlinson — No, sir ; I desire that my motion should be a 
 distinct motion of the House, and not merely referred to the Com- 
 mittee. Its terms are: — 
 
 " That this House cannot view with satisfaction the clauses of a Bill which 
 proposes to base legislation on matters concerning the Church which have 
 received the approval of only one of the Convocations of this country." 
 
 The eleventh clause of the Bill contains a statement that certain 
 changes in the Burial Service had been agreed to by this Convo- 
 cation and by that of York, the truth being that, except in one 
 trifling detail, the latter Convocation has not agreed to those 
 changes. The Bill will thus have the effect of turning into law 
 that which has only been passed by one Convocation. 
 
 Archdeacon Denison — I second the motion with pleasure, because 
 I opposed at every stage the adoption of the Rubrics in question. 
 The whole schedule is in such a confused and wretched state that 
 I should be glad if we succeed in turning it out of the Bill. The 
 so-called relief to the Clergy in that eleventh clause is an 
 " unworthy bait " to get them to accept the Bill. 
 
 The Dean of Chichester — It will be remembered that these 
 changes were proposed under the idea that the Burial Service 
 was a judicial act, but I deny that it is judicial in any sense 
 whatever. 
 
 Archdeacon Allbn — I hope we shall be content to guard our 
 own rights, and leave the Convocation of York to guard their own 
 rights. 
 
 Archdeacon Harrison — I earnestly ask the House to remember 
 that the Convocation of York has in no sense agreed with what was 
 
120 
 
 LOWER HOUSE— June 4. IBurials Bill. 
 
 done by this Convocation, and I quite think, with the writer in the 
 Times, that it would be better to avoid all reference to Convocation 
 in the Bill. As it now stands, the statement in the clause is wholly 
 incorrect, and conveys the false impression that York assented to 
 our Rubrics when in fact that is not the case. 
 
 Canon Gregory — -I think the motion hits a blot, but I cannot 
 agree to the adverse strictures of my friend the Archdeacon of 
 Taunton on the Rubrics recited in the schedule. I sat for three 
 years on the Ritual Commission, and those Rubrics had the fullest 
 consideration. They were drawn up by Bishop Wilberforce, have 
 been revised by a Committee of this House, and accepted by the 
 House itself. I think we should best meet the case by such a 
 motion as the following, which I beg to move: — 
 
 " The Convocation of York not having assented to the whole of the alterations 
 in Schedule B, the Archbishops and the Bishops be requested to move the 
 omission of the words 'ecclesiastical or' in Clause 11, and insert the word 
 ' civil ' before ' censure.' " 
 
 Canon Hayward — I second this amendment. 
 
 The Prolocutor — I am quite unwilling to check discussion, but 
 I really think it would be much better to drop these motions, and 
 at once to refer the Burials Bill to the Committee with instructions 
 to report to us when next we meet. 
 
 Canon Rawlinson — I do not see my way to the withdrawal of my 
 motion. It seems to me not a matter of detail, but of principle. 
 
 Prebendary Miles — I think the reason why York did not pass 
 the same resolution as we did was because they did not understand 
 that, in the case of notorious evil living, the consent referred to was 
 rather intended to apply to friends who did not wish any Christian 
 burial at all. 
 
 Canon Bright — I should wish, in view of the history of the Church 
 of England, to remind the House that, although there are two 
 Convocations and two Provinces, they constitute one Church. It 
 is impossible now to fuse them into one, but I trust a loyal 
 sympathy will be maintained between them. This is not a good 
 time for us to give even a tacit sanction to a statemeut which 
 practically ignores the Northern Province. 
 
 Canon Perry — The Bill has no enacting clause; its object is 
 merely to remove penalties. 
 
 Sir J. E. Philipps — I consider that all faithful Churchmen 
 ought to be thankful for the recognition which this Bill contains of 
 the work of Convocation. 
 
 Canon Jeffreys — I think half a loaf is better than no bread, and 
 we had better take the amount of liberty which the Bill offers us. 
 If the words " no Minister in holy orders shall be liable to any 
 censure or penalty, ecclesiastical or civil, for," <fcc, be altered by 
 
Burials Bilir\ LOWER HOUSE — June 4. 
 
 121 
 
 putting "civil" before censure, and leaving out "ecclesiastical or," 
 every cause of complaint will be removed. 
 
 Canon Hopkins — I do not think the Bill will do any injustice 
 whatever. 
 
 Canon Gregory — With the consent of the House, I should like to 
 substitute the following for my amendment: — 
 
 " That the proposal of Canon Kawlinson be referred to the Committee on the 
 Burials Bill." 
 
 Archdeacon Harrison — I entirely agree with Canon Rawlinson, 
 but I fear that, on the principle of the maxim, " E.v.pressio unius 
 exchisio alterius," I may be supposed to have no other objection to 
 the Burials Bill. If the amendment be not adopted, I shall think it 
 necessary to propose a long rider. 
 
 Canon Rawlinson— I shall be very sorry to find that the House 
 cannot accede to my motion ; for the point which it raises is a very 
 clear one, and one upon which an immediate vote of the House is 
 required. I think, too, the House would do a graceful and a 
 gracious act if it at once lets the Convocation of York know that it 
 does not approve of legislation upon the report of one Provincial 
 Synod. In this case, the phrase " Bis clat qid cito dat " seems to 
 apply. 
 
 Canon Gregory's amendment was then carried by 29 to G. 
 Chancellor Briscoe — I now move: — 
 
 " That it be an instruction to the Committee, to consider whether a clause 
 to the following effect should be inserted in the ' Bill to Amend the Burial 
 Laws,' viz.— 
 
 " That nothing in this Act shall hinder the framing of rules for the regulation 
 of graveyards formed after the passing of this Act, even although such rules 
 may exclude from such graveyards all ministrations other than those of the 
 society or religious denomination for whom such graveyard is formed, and even 
 although such graveyard be consecrated." 
 
 It must be within the knowledge of all present that Dissenters have 
 numerous graveyards of their own, which no one has aright to enter 
 without the consent of the authorities of the chapel. This Bill 
 gives the Clergy no right whatever with respect to those grave- 
 yards; and it seems only fair that Churchpeople should have the 
 power, if they think fit, to form graveyards of a similar character. 
 In the debate in the House of Lords, the Earl of Derby said it was 
 very doubtful whether the Bill would prevent them from doing so; 
 but it is most important that the point be not left in any legal uncer- 
 tainty. Lord Derby said: — 
 
 If private persons, be they few or many, choose to establish a burial- 
 ground of their own in connection witli the Established Church, I see nothing 
 in this Bill, nor in the law as it stands, that prevents their doing so ; and in 
 regard to any such ground I suppose they would be free to frame any rules 
 they pleased. That is a right which ought not to be taken from them, and 
 I do not believe that this Bill in any way disturbs it. 
 
122 
 
 LOWER HOUSE— June 4. [Burial. Bill. 
 
 I believe that if that is conceded it will be found in the course of 
 twenty or thirty years Churchmen will have provided themselves 
 almost everywhere with burial-grounds of their own. 
 
 Canon Butler — I second the motion. It is very remarkable that 
 Lord Selborne should have said, as an argument for his Bill, that 
 for the last twenty years some such measure had been hanging over 
 us, and yet no one had thought it worth while to set apart land for 
 burial-grounds by means of any special conveyance. That, however, 
 has actually been done in the diocese of Oxford under the advice of 
 Sir Robert Phillimore; and at the present moment I am carrying 
 out a similar arrangement. The land will be conveyed to three 
 persons — A, B, and C — and the deed will specify that no service 
 shall be used but that of the Church of England, and that it shall not 
 be used except by Clergymen of that Church. 
 
 Canon Gregory — I move that this resolution also be referred to 
 the Committee. It appears that a large number of important 
 proposals have been suggested, and it is absolutely necessary that 
 they receive careful and deliberate consideration. 
 
 Canon Jeffreys — The Bill only professes to deal with common 
 graveyards, it does not touch private ones. Anybody may establish 
 a private cemetery, but cemeteries paid for by public money are 
 dealt with by the Bill, and the ancient churchyards are held to 
 stand in the same position. 
 
 Archdeacon Harrison — I support the amendment. Unless I am 
 much deceived, I have seen a proposal that private cemeteries be 
 brought under the Bill. We have had warning from the Lord 
 Chancellor as to the fate of endowments; and at this moment the 
 authorities of Keble College are declining to have their chapel 
 consecrated because they do not know into whose hands it may fall. 
 We read of a place which " hath enlarged herself and opened her 
 mouth without measure; and their glory, and their multitude, and 
 their pomp, and he that rejoiceth shall descend into it." In the 
 same way it seems intended that all existing churchyards and 
 cemeteries shall be swept into the Bill. 
 
 Archdeacon Bathurst — I support the amendment, as it is 
 important that the Bill leave the House of Lords in the form in 
 which it is wished that it should pass, so that, if it comes back from 
 the Commons denuded of the provisions we desire to see in it, we 
 may have safe ground upon which to meet it. 
 
 Prebendary Hockin — Two members of my family have given a 
 graveyard, and I myself have made an addition to one; but in 
 neither case should we have done so if we had dreamt of the 
 possibility of our churchyards being made common to all the 
 religious bodies of England. 
 
 Canon Sumner — There is a difficulty in this matter — no Bishop 
 will consecrate a burial-ground conveyed to A, B, and C. 
 
Orthodox \ LOWER HOUSE— June 4. 123 
 Eastern Churches. ) 
 
 Canon Butler — I know of one Bishop who will do so, stipulating 
 only that one of the trustees shall be the Vicar or churchwai'den. 
 
 The Prolocutor — I wish to point out to the House that the Com- 
 mittee will have power to act for the House during its recess, so no 
 time will be lost. 
 
 The amendment was then agreed to. 
 
 Treasurer Gibbs — I move — 
 
 " That the two Burial Bills now bcforo Parliament bo referred to the Com- 
 mittee on that subject." 
 
 Archdeacon Holbech — I second the motion. 
 
 Agreed to. 
 
 DIOCESAN CONFERENCES. 
 
 Treasurer Gibbs — I move, on behalf of Archdeacon Hessey, the 
 adoption of the resolutions of the Committee on the Reports of 
 Diocesan Conferences — (see Appendix) — with a request that the 
 President would communicate them to the President of the Northern 
 Convocation. 
 
 Canon Neville — I second the motion. 
 
 Agreed to. 
 
 Treasurer Gibbs — I also move that the Committee be directed to 
 prepare a similar Report, and bring it before the House at the 
 beginning of 1881. 
 
 Canon Gregory — I move instead — 
 
 " That this Committee be instructed to collect, if possible, from year to year, 
 the number of churches consecrated, and the cost of those churches ; the 
 number of churches restored, and the cost of such restorations ; the property 
 given to the Church for purposes of endowment or for the repairs of churches ; 
 and the number of Priests and Deacons ordained, with the names of the Univer- 
 sities or Theological Colleges at which they were trained." 
 
 Canon Butler — I second the motion. 
 
 Archdeacon Harrison — I doubt whether the Committee would 
 be able to obtain the information in time. I fear that when we have 
 the result we shall have to say — 
 
 Amphora ccepit 
 Institui, currente rota cur urceus exit? 
 
 But in the meautime this urceus will be found to be a considerable 
 burden. 
 
 The motion was carried nem. con. 
 
 intercommunion with the orthodox eastern churches. 
 
 Canon Yard — 1 beg to move the adoption of the resolutions 
 appended to the Report (see Appendix) of the Committee on this 
 subject. Besides the Orthodox Eastern Churches, there are several 
 
124 LOWER HOUSE— June 4. ( Orthodox 
 
 ( Eastern ChurcJies. 
 
 others desiring intercommunion with us, wliose position is somewhat 
 misunderstood. Of such bodies the late Dr. J. M. Neale said that 
 until they chose to submit to the last of the great Councils, they 
 would not be received into communion by the Orthodox Churches, 
 who were extremely jealous upon that point. Several matters of 
 great interest have lately occurred, such as our connection with 
 Cyprus, and certain acts of communion between the Bishop of 
 Gibraltar and the authorities of the Greek Church. If I had time 
 I should like also to refer to other similar matters; but I pass on to 
 notice some objections which have been taken to the Report. One 
 is the positiou of the word " marriage " — which I do not myself 
 scruple to call, in a certain sense, a " sacrament " — between the two 
 great Sacraments. But in that respect the present Report only 
 follows the precedent of the Report of 1874. Another objection is 
 to a remark in the Report, that the alleged Erastianism of the 
 Eastern Church was repudiated in its Catechism; but I suppose 
 that, if a similar charge were made against us, we should meet it by 
 the authoritative language of our Articles and Prayer-book. Then 
 exception is taken to the term "reunion;" but though it is perfectly 
 true that our union with the Eastern Church has long passed, it is 
 the opinion of many that the very earliest impressions made upon 
 our Church came from the East rather than from the West. The 
 present position of intercommunion is extremely critical, but at the 
 same time it is extremely hopeful and interesting. And here it may 
 be well to record the following words of the Regius Professor of 
 Hebrew in Oxford, in his work on The Office of tlie English 
 Church : — 
 
 The authorities of the Great Russian Church .... look favourably 
 on the wish for restored communion. Our position gives us an advantage 
 towards her also, because, whilst we are widespread enough to be no object 
 of contempt, there can be no dread on either side of any interference with 
 the self-government of each in the portion of God's heritage which in His 
 Providence each occupies. We have no ground to fear in regard to her lest 
 she should force back upon us that vast practical system, still prevalent in 
 the Western Church, which was one occasion, and is the justification, of our 
 isolated condition. . . . We should have nothing to ask of her except 
 communion. 
 
 We must endeavour to break down the barriers of this isolation. 
 We are too much addicted to regard our Church as an isolated one; 
 and the present movement is especially valuable as tending to 
 counteract that idea. In reference to the distribution of copies of 
 the New Testament suggested by the Bishop of Gibraltar, the Com- 
 mittee point out the importance of addressing the Society for 
 Promoting Christian Knowledge, on the subject of translations, 
 especially of the Prayer-book of the English Church. It appears, 
 from a communication received by the Chairman of the Committee 
 from the Bishop of Lincoln, that much mischief has been done by 
 bad translations of our Prayer-book, and also of the New Testa- 
 ment, into a vulgar dialect of bad Romaic. " All the Church books 
 of the modern Greek arc," he states, " in Hellenic, or rather in 
 
Orthodox ) LOWER HOUSE— June 4. 125 
 
 Eastern Churches. { 
 
 Hellenistic; and we should put our Prayer-book and the New 
 Testament into a false and degrading position by our versions of 
 these into Romaic." On this subject, the Archimandrite, Dr. 
 Myriantheus, also wrote: — 
 
 Our people are accustomed to hear in our churches the Gospels, tho Acts of 
 the Apostles, tho Liturgy, the hymns, and the rest of our services in the 
 language of the New Testament; consequently no translation into modern 
 Greek, whether it be of the Holy Scriptures or Liturgies, will be acceptable to 
 our people. Thus it is highly necessary to publish a translation of your Liturgy 
 resembling in its style the Liturgies of St. Chrysosfcom and St. Basil. 
 
 Archdeacon Bathorst — I second the motion. 
 
 Archdeacon Harrison — Whilst the first resolution does not 
 commit the House to any special statement in the Report, it does 
 commit us to taking that Report into consideration. The last time 
 the same matter was before the House was in 1876, and then, and 
 also in 1874, when it first came before us, it was thought too 
 important to be discussed and dealt with at the end of the Session, 
 and the question was adjourned. Essentially the same question is 
 now before the House as in 1874 and 1876, and I do not think that 
 such a delicate and difficult matter could now be considered. Whilst 
 we are not committed to any particular expressions in the Report, 
 nobody could take one Report into consideration without having fully 
 mastered the other Reports and knowing the grounds upon which 
 the resolutions stand. There is also the same objection to con- 
 sidering the Report now as previously — namely, the small number of 
 members present. For that reason, and also because I do not think 
 the members know sufficient of the other Reports, I am of opinion 
 that the resolutions ought not now to be considered. 
 
 Canon Jeffreys — I agree with Archdeacon Harrison that it would 
 be improper to send such a request as that contained in the second 
 resolution to the Upper House until the members of the Lower 
 House are really masters of the question. 
 
 The Prolocutor — The Report has been before the older members 
 of Convocation for a whole year. We shall never be able to do our 
 work properly if, when the matter is brought before us in duo 
 order, it is met with the remark that it has not been read. I do 
 not wish to force a discussion, nor can I prevent the motion of Arch- 
 deacon Harrison; but 1 think it a very difficult, awkward, and 
 unsatisfactory proceeding if, after having had the Report in our 
 hands for a year, we are to be told that we ought to be acquainted 
 with the Reports of 1874 and 1876. There are many members who 
 belonged to the House in those years, and I assume that they know 
 what those Reports contained. With regard to the particular 
 point in the resolutions for intercommunion with the Eastern 
 Church in respect of baptism, marriage, and the Holy Eucharist, 
 the older members of the House will remember that the whole 
 subject before the Committee is that of intercommunion with 
 
120 LOWER HOUSE— June 4. f Orthodox 
 
 I Eastern Churches. 
 
 the Orthodox Eastern Church. The object of the Committee from 
 the time of its appointment has been to endeavour to promote such 
 intercommunion; to secure, if possible, that the Christians of other 
 communions living in places where the Orthodox Church is not only 
 dominant, but also isolated, should not be excluded from Christian 
 rites. We should not hesitate to bury an Eastern Orthodox Christian ; 
 we should not hesitate to marry one of that communion, nor should we 
 hesitate to give one the Holy Eucharist. Therefore, so far as the 
 English Church is concerned, we are prepared for such intercom- 
 munion at once. The question is whether members of our own 
 Church in Eastern places may also, if they wish for it — many of our 
 communion would not care to do so — receive the Holy Eucharist 
 from the hands of a Greek priest. With that view the Committee 
 was appointed many years ago. Its Reports have shown what has 
 been done, and what steps should be taken. The movement has 
 advanced so far that in some parts of the Eastern Christian Church 
 the Priest is authorised to give Christian burial to the members of 
 our Church with their own rites. That was authorised, just as we 
 were prepared to bury in our churchyards every Christian who was 
 not excommunicated. That result has been secured partly by the 
 action of the Committee of the House and partly by the action of 
 other bodies ; and the Committee has gone on for a long time, and 
 has taken some steps towards bringing about an intercommunion. 
 In one case there was a long statement as to what was done at the 
 Conference at Bonn, where steps had been taken not only for inter- 
 communion with the English Church, but for a general union of 
 all Episcopal Churches. In that document was included a very 
 long doctrinal statement. Some portions of that statement were 
 objected to, but what have difficulties on that score to do with 
 the proposals now before the House? The Committee have 
 merely asked that, instead of various tentative motions, some 
 decisive step be taken on our side. There is a Committee in 
 Russia of the friends of Christianity and a Committee of the 
 American Church which was working in the same direction, and 
 many steps have been taken indirectly to further intercommunion 
 with the Churches. In one case — that of a burial — there was a 
 direct communication between our Archbishops and some of the 
 Greek prelates, and it had a successful result. Nothing what- 
 ever that the Archdeacon has said shows why the House should not 
 now consider the question, except that there are not many members 
 present. The number of the members of the House is 155, and of that 
 number there are at least thirty-five present, and five persons more 
 constitute a House in that important assembly which legislates for a 
 great empire. I hope the House, having present thirty-five out of 155 
 instead of forty out of 658, will not think thirty-five too small a 
 number to proceed with their work. 
 
 Canon Yard — I am willing, if in order, to postpone the discussion 
 until next Session. 
 
 Prebendary Edwards — I think the present a very opportune 
 
Burials Bill.] LOWER HOUSE — June 4. 
 
 127 
 
 time to call public attention to the subject of intercommunion with 
 the Eastern Churches. The people in the East are now suffering 
 from a famine — from a visitation in its extent unparalleled in the 
 world. Certainly the appeal that has gone forth is beginning to 
 excite interest in, and direct attention to, the subject; and anything 
 which associates a charitable feeling with the question of inter- 
 communion of the Churches will be helpful. 
 
 The first resolution was then carried. 
 
 Canon Yard — I now move the second resolution : — 
 
 " That the Prolocutor be requested to take this Report to the Upper House, 
 with the prayer that his Grace tho President will be pleased to take official 
 steps for intercommunion with tho Eastern Orthodox Churches, by a concordat 
 with tho Greek prelates in respect to the Offices of Baptism, Marriage, and tho 
 Holy Eucharist; it being clearly understood that members of the Anglican 
 Church will not, by reception of such Offices from the Eastern Churches, 
 interrupt communion with their own Church." 
 
 Archdeacon Harrison — I consider the members ought to have 
 before their minds all the difficulties in connection witb intercom- 
 munion as to baptism, marriage, and the Holy Eucharist before they 
 send the Report up to the Primate of the Church. 
 
 Canon Jeffreys — I have not been able to give sufficient atten- 
 tion to the Report, and I believe other members are in a similar 
 position. I think, therefore, we cannot ask bis Grace to take any 
 final step in the matter. I move, as an amendment — 
 
 " That the Prolocutor be requested to take this Report to the Upper 
 House." 
 
 Canon Barlow — I second this. 
 Canon Yard — I accept this proposal. 
 
 It being carried, Canon Yard then moved the third resolution, as 
 follows : — 
 
 " That their lordships of tho Upper House be respectfully asked to call the 
 attention of tho Foreign Translation Committee of the Society for Promoting 
 Christian Knowledge to the remarks of the Bishop of Lincoln noticed in 
 this Report ; and also to the letter of the Greek Archimandrite in the 
 Appendix on the subject of translations of Holy Scripture and of our Liturgy 
 into Greek." 
 
 It is a common-sense resolution, which will lead to a very important 
 result, and I therefore hope it will be carried. 
 
 The resolution having been seconded, it was agreed to. 
 
 The Prolocutor — I will take the Report and the resolutions to 
 the Upper House wben it is in Session again. 
 
 BURIALS BILL. 
 
 The Prolocutor — I have received the following message from the 
 Upper House in reference to the resolution of this House, agreed 
 to on the 3rd inst. : — 
 
128 
 
 LOWER HOUSE — June 4. [Burial* Bill. 
 
 " Their lordships are in doubt whether any precedent exiRts for the com- 
 munication to the Upper House of a document such as that now laid on the 
 tabic, embodying a certain protest not in the form of a gravamen, or an 
 articulus cleri. The President, therefore, desires the Prolocutor to desire the 
 Committee of Privileges of the Lower House to search for precedents which 
 may be submitted to their lordships." 
 
 The Benediction was pronounced by the Archdeacon of London 
 (Bishop Piers Claughton), and the Minutes of this Session were 
 read and confirmed, and ordered to be reduced into Acts, according 
 to the ancient practice of Convocation. The Prolocutor then 
 stated that he had received the directions of his Grace the President 
 to continue and prorogue the present sitting of this Convocation 
 to and until Tuesday, the 13th day of July next ensuing, to a certain 
 Uppar Chamber, commonly called the Board-room, of the Bounty- 
 office, situated in Dean's Yard, Westminster, at eleven o'clock in 
 the forenoon. 
 
THE BURIALS BILL 
 
 AS ORIGINALLY INTRODUCED AND AS AMENDED 
 IN THE HOUSE OP LORDS. 
 
 A BILL INTITULED AN ACT TO AMEND THE BURIAL LAWS. 
 (Read a Second Time June 3; Bead a Third Time and Passed 
 June 24, 1880.) 
 
 [The amendments introduced into the Bill during its passage through the 
 House of Lords are printed in italics.] 
 
 Whereas it is expedient to amend the law of burial in England: 
 
 Be it therefore enacted by the Queen's most Excellent Majesty, 
 by and with the advice and consent of the Lords Spiritual and 
 Temporal, and Commons, in this present Parliament assembled, and 
 by the authority of the same, as follows: — 
 
 1. After the passing of this Act any relative, friend, or legal repre- 
 sentative* having the charge of or being responsible for the burial of 
 a deceased person may give forty-eightf hours' notice in writing, 
 indorsed on the outside " Notice of Burial," to or leave at the usual 
 place of abode of the Rector, Vicar, or other Incumbent, or in his 
 absence the officiating Minister in charge of any parish or ecclesi- 
 astical district or place where there is no unconsecrated burial-ground 
 or cemetery in which the parishioners or inhabitants have rights of 
 burial, or any person appointed by him to receive such notice, that 
 it is intended that such deceased person shall be buried within the 
 churchyard or graveyard of such parish or ecclesiastical district 
 without the performance in the manner prescribed by law of the 
 service for the burial of the dead according to the rites of the 
 Church of England, and after receiving such notice, no Rector, 
 Vicar, Incumbent, or officiating Minister shall be liable to any 
 censure or penalty, ecclesiastical or civil, for permitting any such 
 burial as aforesaid. Such notice shall be in writing, plainly signed 
 ivith the name and stating the address of the person giving it, and shall 
 be in the form or to the effect of Schedule (A) annexed to this Act. 
 
 Such power of giving notice of burial shall not apply to any con- 
 secrated portion of a burial-ground formed under the Acts fifteenth and 
 sixteenth Victoria, chapter eighty-five, and sixteenth and seventeenth 
 Victoria, chapter one hundred and thirty -four, of which some portion has 
 been left unconsecrated ; nor to any consecrated burial-ground in a place 
 where one or more unconsecrated grounds are also provided under the 
 Act twentieth and twenty -first Victoria, chapter eighty-one, section three. 
 Save as herein provided, the word " graveyard " in this Act shall 
 include any burial-ground or cemetery vested in any burial board, 
 or provided under any Act relating to the burial of the dead, in 
 which the parishioners or inhabitants of any parish or ecclesiastical 
 
 * In original draft "person." 
 
 t In original draft " twenty-four." 
 
ii 
 
 THE BURIALS BILL. 
 
 district have rights of burial, and of which no part is left unconse- 
 crated ; and in the case of any such bnrial-ground or cemetery, if a 
 Chaplain is appointed to perform the Burial Service of the Church 
 of England therein, such Chaplain shall be deemed to be the 
 Incumbent or officiating Minister, to whom notice is to be given 
 under this Act; and such notice as aforesaid shall also be given to 
 the clerk of the burial board, if any, in whom any such burial- 
 ground or cemetery may be vested. 
 
 2. Such notice, in the case of any poor person deceased, whom 
 the guardians of any parish or union are required or authorised by 
 law to bury, may be given to the Rector, Vicar, or other Incumbent 
 in manner aforesaid, and also to the master of any workhouse in which 
 such poor person may have died, or otherwise to the said guardians, 
 by the husband, wife, or next of kin of such poor person, who, for 
 the purposes of this Act, shall be deemed to be the person having 
 the charge of the burial of such deceased poor person; and in any 
 such case it shall be the duty of the said guardians to permit the 
 body of such deceased person to be buried in the manner provided 
 by this Act. 
 
 3. Such notice shall state the day and hour when such burial is 
 proposed to take place, and in case the time so stated be incon- 
 venient on account of some other service having been, previously to 
 the receipt of such notice, appointed to take place in such church- 
 yard or graveyard, or the church or chapel connected therewith, the 
 person receiving the notice shall, unless some other day or time 
 shall be mutually arranged within twenty-four^ hours from the time 
 of receiving such notice, signify in writing, to be delivered to or 
 left at the address or usual place of abode of the person from whom 
 such notice has been received, or at the house where the deceased 
 person is lying, at which hour of the day named in the notice, or (if 
 auch day shall be a Sunday, Good Friday, or Christmas Day) of the 
 day next following, such burial shall take place; and it shall be 
 lawful for the burial to take place, and it shall take place, at the 
 hour so appointed or mutually arranged, and in other respects in 
 accordance with the notice: Provided that, unless it shall be other, 
 wise mutually arranged, the time of such burial shall be between 
 the hours of ten o'clock in the forenoon and six o'clock in the 
 afternoon if the burial be between the first day of April and the 
 first day of October, and between the hours of ten o'clock in the 
 forenoon and three o'clock in the afternoon if the burial be between 
 the first day of October and the first day of April : Provided also, 
 that no such burial shall take place in any churchyard on Sunday, or 
 on Good Friday or Christmas Day, except by the consent of the person 
 receiving such notice. 
 
 4. When no such intimation of change of hour is sent to the 
 person from whom the notice has been received, or left at the house 
 where the deceased person is lying, the burial shall take place in 
 accordance with and at the time specified in such notice. 
 
 5. All regulations as to the position and making of the grave 
 which would be in force in such churchyard or graveyard in the 
 
 J " 18" in original draft. 
 
THE BURIALS BILL. 
 
 ill 
 
 ca3e of persons interred therein with the service of the Church of 
 England shall be in force as to burials under this Act; and any 
 person who, if the burial had taken place with the service of the 
 Church of England, would have been entitled by law to receive any 
 fee, shall be entitled, in case of a burial under this Act, to receive 
 the like fee in respect thereof. 
 
 6. At any burial under this Act all persons shall have free access 
 to the churchyard or graveyard in which the same shall take place. 
 The burial may take place, at the option of the person so having the 
 charge of or being responsible for the same as aforesaid, either 
 without any religious service, or with such Christian and orderly 
 religious service at the grave, as such person shall think fit; and 
 any person or persons who shall be thereunto invited, or be 
 authorised by the person having the charge of or being responsible 
 for such burial, may conduct such service or take part in any 
 religious act thereat. The word " Christian " in this section shall 
 include every religious service used by any Church, denomination, or 
 person professing to be Christian. 
 
 7. The foregoing sections of this Act shall only apply to the church- 
 yard or graveyard in any parish or ecclesiastical district where there is 
 no unconsecrated burial-ground or cemetery in which the parishioners or 
 inhabitants have rights of burial, and shall cease and determine in 
 respect of any such parish or ecclesiastical district so soon as such 
 unconsecrated burial-ground or cemetery has been provided. 
 
 8. All burials under this Act, whether with or without a religious 
 service, shall be conducted in a decent and orderly manner; and 
 every person guilty of any riotous, violent, or indecent behaviour at 
 any burial under this Act, or wilfully obstructing such burial or 
 any such service as aforesaid thereat, or who shall, in any such 
 churchyard or graveyard as aforesaid, deliver any address, not 
 being part of or incidental to a religious service permitted by this 
 Act, and not otherwise permitted by any lawful authority, or who 
 shall, under colour of any religious service or otherwise, in any such 
 churchyard or graveyard, wilfully endeavour to bring into contempt 
 or obloquy the Christian religion, or the belief or worship of any 
 Church or denomination of Christians, or the members or any 
 Minister of any such Church or denomination, or any other person, 
 shall be guilty of a misdemeanour. 
 
 9. All powers and authorities now existing by law for the preserva- 
 tion of order, and for the prevention and punishment of disorderly 
 behaviour in any churchyard or graveyard, may be exercised in any 
 case of burial under this Act in the same manner and by the same 
 persons as if the same had been a burial according to the rites of the 
 Church of England. 
 
 10. Nothing in this Act shall authorise the burial of any person 
 in any place where such person would have had no right of inter- 
 ment if this Act had not passed, or without performance of any express 
 condition on which, by the terms of any trust-deed, any right of interment 
 in any burial-ground vested in trustees under such trust-deed, may have 
 been granted. 
 
 11. When any burial has taken place under this Act the person 
 so having the charge of or being responsible for such burial, as 
 
THE BUlilALS BILL. 
 
 aforesaid, shall, on the day thereof, or the next day thereafter, 
 transmit a certificate of such burial, in the form or to the effect of 
 Schedule (B) annexed to this Act, to the Rector, Vicar, Incumbent, 
 or other officiating Minister in charge of the parish or district in 
 which the churchyard or graveyard is situate or to which it belongs, 
 or in the case of any burial-ground or cemetery vested in any burial 
 board to the person required by law to keep the register of burials 
 in such burial-ground or cemetery, who shall thereupon enter such 
 burial in the register of burials of such parish or district, or of such 
 burial-ground or cemetery, and such entry shall form part thereof. 
 Such entry, instead of stating by whom the ceremony of burial was 
 performed, shall state by whom the same has been certified under this 
 Act. Any person who shall wilfully make any false statement in 
 such certificate, and any Rector, Vicar, or Minister, or other such 
 person as aforesaid, receiving such certificate, who shall refuse or 
 neglect duly to enter such burial in such register as aforesaid, shall 
 be guilty of a misdemeanour. 
 
 12. Every order of a coroner or certificate of a registrar given under 
 the provisions of section seventeen of the Births and Deaths Registration 
 Act, 1874, shall, in the case of a burial under that Act, be delivered to 
 the relative, friend, or legal representative of the deceased, having the 
 charge of or being responsible for the burial, instead of being delivered 
 to the person who buries or performs any funeral or religious service for 
 the burial of the body of the deceased; and any person to whom such 
 order or certificate shall have been given by the coroner or registrar who 
 fails so to deliver or cause to be delivered the same shall be liable to a 
 penalty not exceeding forty shillings, and any such relative, friend, or 
 legal representative so having charge of or being responsible for tJie 
 burial of the body of any person buried under this Act as aforesaid, 
 as to which no order or certificate under the same section of the said 
 Act shall have been delivered to him, shall, within seven days after the 
 burial, give notice thereof in writing to the registrar ; and if he fail so 
 to do shall be liable to a penalty not exceeding ten pounds. 
 
 13. No Minister in holy orders of the Church of England shall 
 be subject to any censure or penalty for officiating with the service 
 prescribed by law for the burial of the dead according to the rites 
 of the said Church in any unconsecrated burial-ground or cemetery, 
 or part of a burial-ground or cemetery, in any case in which he 
 might have lawfully used the same service, if such burial-ground 
 or cemetery, or part of a burial-ground or cemetery, had been con- 
 secrated. The relative, friend, or legal representative, having charge of 
 or being responsible for the burial of any deceased person who had a right 
 of interment in any such unconsecrated ground vested in any burial board, 
 or provided under any Act relating to the burial of the dead, shall be 
 entitled, if he think fit, to have such burial performed therein according 
 to the rites of the Church of England by any minister of the said Church 
 who may be willing to perform the same. 
 
 14. And whereas the Archbishop, Bishops, and Clergy of the 
 Province of Canterbury in Convocation assembled, in obedience to 
 her Majesty's Royal Licence and Letter of Business, bearing date 
 respectively the fourth and sixth days of July, in the thirty-eighth 
 year of her Majesty's reign, did on the thirty-first day of July one 
 
THE UURIALS BILL. 
 
 thousand eight hundred and seventy-nine agree (among other 
 matters by the said Letter of Business referred to them) upon certain 
 recommendations concerning the Office of the Church of England for 
 the burial of the dead, the first six of which were proposed by them 
 to be embodied in certain altered and additional Rubrics in the form 
 Bet forth in Schedule (C) to this Act annexed, and which recom- 
 mendations were by them duly submitted to her Majesty: And 
 whereas recommendations to the same effect with those numbered 1, 3, 
 4, and 5 in the said Schedule ((7) have also been agreed to, and 
 submitted to her Majesty, by the Archbishop, Bishops, and Clergy 
 of the Province of York, in Convocation assembled, in obedience to 
 her Majesty's Royal Licence and Letter of Business in like manner 
 addressed to them : It is hereby enacted that, from and after the 
 passing of this Act, it shall be lawful for any Minister in holy orders 
 of the Church of England, in any of the cases and matters provided for by 
 the several forms of altered and additional Rubrics contained in the said 
 Schedule (C), to act in conformity therewith without being subject to any 
 ecclesiastical or other censure or penalty: Provided always that the word 
 " crime " in the said Schedule (C) shall mean only an offence against the 
 criminal law of this realm. 
 
 15. Save as is in this Act expressly provided as to Ministers of the 
 Church of England nothing herein contained shall authorise or enable 
 any such Minister who shall not have become a declared member of 
 any other Church or denomination, or have executed a deed of 
 relinquishment under the " Clerical Disabilities Act, 1870," to do any 
 act which he would not by law have been authorised or enabled to do 
 if this Act had not passed, or to exempt him from any censure or 
 penalty in respect thereof. 
 
 16. This Act shall extend to the Channel Islands and the Isle of 
 Man ; but shall not apply to Scotland or to Ireland. 
 
 17. This Act may be cited as the Burial Laws Amendment Act, 
 1880. 
 
 SCHEDULES TO WHICH THIS ACT REFERS. 
 Schedule (A). 
 Notice of Burial. 
 
 I , of , being the relative [or friend, or 
 
 lcgal representative, as the case may be, describing the relation, if 
 a relative], having the charge of or being responsible for the burial 
 of A. B., of , who died at , in the parish 
 
 of , on the day of , do hereby 
 
 give you notice that it is intended by me that the body of the said 
 A. B. shall be buried within the \_here describe the churchyard or 
 graveyard in which the body is to be buried], on the day of 
 
 , at the hour of , without the performance in 
 
 the manner prescribed by law of the service for the burial of the 
 dead according to the rites of the Church of England, and I give 
 this notice pursnant to the " Burial Laws Amendment Act, 1880." 
 
 To the Rector [or, as the case may be,] of 
 
vi 
 
 THE BURIALS BILL. 
 
 Schedule (B). 
 
 I , of , the person having the charge of 
 
 [or being responsible for] the burial of the deceased, do hereby 
 certify that on the day of , A. B., of , 
 
 aged , was bnried in the churchyard [or graveyard] of 
 
 the parish [or district] of 
 
 To the Rector [or, as the case may be,'] of 
 
 Schedule (C). 
 
 1. That the first Rubric of the Office for the Burial of the Dead 
 stand as follows: — 
 
 Here it is to be noted that neither the Office ensuing nor the 
 Shortened Office hereinafter provided is to be used for any that die 
 unbaptised or excommunicate, or in the commission of any grievous 
 crime, or, having laid violent hands upon themselves, have not been 
 found to have been of unsound mind. 
 
 2. Add the following Rubric: — 
 
 Nevertheless in cases in which neither of the aforesaid Offices may 
 be used, it shall not be unlawful for the Minister, at the request of 
 the kindred or friends of the deceased, to use after the body has been 
 laid into the earth prayers taken from the Book of Common Prayer 
 and portions of Holy Scripture, approved by the Ordinary, so that 
 they be not part of tbe Order for the Burial of the Dead, nor of the 
 Order of the Administration of the Holy Communion. 
 
 3. In the rubric, " after they are come into the church, shall be 
 read one or both of these Psalms following," 
 
 For " read " substitute " said or sung." 
 
 4. At the end of the Burial Office, after " The grace of our Lord," 
 Ac, add: — 
 
 If occasion require, the words " Lord have mercy, &c," the 
 Lord's Prayer, the prayer Almighty God, with Whom, fyc, and the 
 Collect following, may, at the discretion of the Minister, be said in 
 the church after the Lesson. 
 
 5. On the request or with the consent of the kindred or friends, 
 it shall be lawful for the Minister to use only the following service 
 at the burial : — The three sentences of the Scriptures to be said or 
 sung on meeting the corpse at the entrance of the churchyard ; and 
 after they are come into the church one or both of these 
 Psalms following — Psalm xxxix. and Psalm xc; then the Lesson, 
 1 Cor. xv. 20. 
 
 When they come to the grave, while the corpse is made ready to 
 be laid into the earth, the Priest shall say, or the Priest and clerks 
 shall sing, the sentences beginning "Man that is born of, &c," 
 ending with the words " Fall from Thee." Then shall follow the 
 words " Lord have mercy, &c," the Lord's Prayer, and " The Grace 
 of our Lord." 
 
 6. Whenever either of the two foregoing services be used it shall 
 be lawful for the officiating Minister, at his discretion, to allow the 
 use of hymns and anthems in the church or at the grave. 
 
CONVOCATION OF CANTERBURY. 
 LOWER HOUSE. 
 
 " Committee* to receive the Official Reports of the several 
 Diocesan Conferences of the Province, and make such Report 
 from time to time to this House upon the matter of such 
 Reports as may be deemed desirable." (Appointed June 26, 
 1879, in pursuance of a unanimous vote of the Lower House.) 
 
 The Committee held a meeting on Wednesday, July 2nd, 1879, 
 when the Archdeacon of Middlesex was appointed Chairman, and the 
 ' Resolutions following were agreed to, viz. : — 
 
 That the Chairman request one member of Committee, belonging, if 
 possible, to each Diocese in the Province of Canterbury in which there 
 is or shall hereafter be established a Diocesan Conference, to act as a 
 Corresponding Member. 
 
 The duty of such Corresponding Member to be, 
 
 1. To collect and transmit to the Chairman verbatim reports of all 
 resolutions of general Church interest which have been, or shall be, 
 passed by his Conference during the course of this present year, 1879, 
 with the dates of the passing of such resolutions, and, if divisions have 
 taken place, with the numbers for and against. 
 
 "The Prolocutor (Br. Biclcerstcth). 
 Archdeacon of Middlesex (Dr. Hessey, Chairman). 
 
 Surrey (Dr. Utterton, 'Suffragan 
 
 Bishop of Guildford) {deceased). 
 Ely {Mr. Emery). 
 Exeter (Mr. Sanders). 
 Stafford (Mr. lies). 
 Nottingham {Mr. Maltby). 
 Bristol (Mr. Randall). 
 Norwich (Mr. Peroivne). 
 Northampton (Dr. Thickncsse). 
 Colchester (Mr. Ady). 
 St. David's (Mr. Lewis). 
 Coventry (Mr. Holbech). 
 Dorset (Mr. Sanctuary). 
 Lewes (Dr. Hannah). 
 Montgomery (Mr. Ffoulkes). 
 
 (Five to form a quorum). 
 * Afterwards nr-.med by the Prolocutor in t 
 
 [ 144 ] 
 
 Canon Gregory. 
 
 „ Rawlinson. 
 
 „ Clements. 
 
 „ Puckle. 
 
 „ Erskine Clarke. 
 
 „ Sumner. 
 
 „ Butler. 
 
 „ Pownall. 
 
 „ Douglas. 
 
 „ Neville. 
 
 „ Bevan. 
 Prebendary Ainslie. 
 
 Buller. 
 Mr. Hockin. 
 „ Knight. 
 „ P. C. Ellis * 
 
2 
 
 2. To add to such collection a supplemental statement specifying, 
 with the same particulars, any important resolutions upon the same 
 subjects which may have been passed in previous years. 
 
 3. At his discretion, to communicate any resolutions passed by his 
 Conference in previous years, upon other subjects which have still a 
 living and pressing interest in the Church, and have not ceased to be 
 matters of debate. 
 
 4. To furnish the Chairman with a copy of the constitution and 
 working rules of his Conference, with the date of its establishment. 
 
 N.B. It was understood that the word Conference was to include 
 Synod, as applicable to the meeting held in the Diocese of Salisbury, 
 Council as applicable to the meeting held in the united Diocese of 
 Gloucester and Bristol, and the Archidiaconal Conferences presided over 
 by the Bishop (as well as the Diocesan Conference) existing in the 
 Diocese of Ely or elsewhere. 
 
 It was also understood that the Chairman would gladly receive com- 
 munications from any other Members besides those specially nominated 
 as Corresponding Members. 
 
 And further that the above Resolutions should be considered applic- 
 able, until amended, to years after 1879. 
 
 In pursuance of these Resolutions is subjoined a list of all the 
 Dioceses within the Province, to each of which, if already possessing a 
 Conference, is attached the name of the Corresponding Member : — 
 
 DIOCESES. 
 
 Canterbury . 
 London 
 Winchester . 
 Bangor . 
 Bath and Wells 
 Chichester 
 Ely 
 
 Exeter . 
 Gloucester and Bristol 
 Hereford 
 Lichfield 
 Lincoln . 
 Llandaff 
 Norwich 
 Oxford . 
 Peterborough 
 Rochester 
 St. Alban's 
 St. Asaph 
 St. David's . 
 Salisbury 
 Truro . 
 Worcester 
 
 CORRESPONDING MEMBERS. 
 
 Canon Rawlinson. 
 (No Conference at present.) 
 Canon Sumner. 
 Mr. P. C. Ellis. 
 Prebendary Buller. 
 Archdeacon of Lewes. 
 Archdeacon of Ely. 
 Archdeacon of Exeter. 
 Archdeacon of Bristol. 
 (Conference announced for 1880.) 
 Archdeacon of Stafford. 
 Archdeacon of Nottingham. 
 (No Conference at present.) 
 Archdeacon of Norwich. 
 Canon Butler. 
 
 Archdeacon of Northampton. 
 (Conference announced for 1880.) 
 Canon Neville. 
 Archdeacon of Montgomery. 
 (Conference announced for 1880.) 
 Archdeacon of Dorset. 
 Mr. Hockin. 
 
 (No Conference at present.) 
 
s 
 
 It was hoped that the Corresponding Members would forward their 
 reports to the Chairman early in December, 1879, so that they might 
 be tabulated and be in the hands of the Committee by the commence- 
 ment of the year 1880. From various circumstances many of the 
 Corresponding Members could not do this, and, as a matter of fact, 
 some reports did not come in till the early part of March. 
 
 This, however, was of no great importance ; for Convocation had 
 no Group of Sessions in February, and the Report of the Committee 
 might have been presented at the Group of Sessions which was ex- 
 pected in April. 
 
 The dissolution of Parliament caused the Convocation which 
 appointed the Committee to disappear. 
 
 But they considered it right to continue their task, which was far 
 advanced when the dissolution was announced, and they respectfully 
 submit it to the New Convocation, to be dealt with as shall seem 
 expedient. 
 
 They preface it with a few remarks. 
 
 The utmost has been done to sift and tabulate the reports of the 
 several Diocesan Conferences which have been placed in the hands of 
 the Committee. 
 
 The work has been an interesting one, but has cost a good deal of 
 labour, and involved some practical difficulty. 
 
 Diocesan Conferences are, as a whole, a new institution. In some 
 cases they have been established so recently as hardly to have assumed 
 such form and working order as will bear analysis. 
 
 For instance, 
 
 Though, in some Dioceses, resolutions have been passed, and carried 
 into effect by means of diligent Committees, which have produced 
 tangible results, 
 
 In others, resolutions have been simply carried. 
 
 In others, papers have been read without discussion. 
 
 In others, disenssionshave been raised without resolutions being passed. 
 
 In others, attention has been merely drawn to wants, gravamina, 
 or defects, no general discussion having ensued. 
 
 In others, the matters under discussion have been chiefly the con- 
 stitution or reorganisation of the Conference itself. 
 
 This diversity of circumstances or of procedure has, of course, 
 rendered the Report of the Committee more unsystematic and frag- 
 mentary than it might otherwise have been. But they believe that 
 the very exhibition of what may, without disrespect, be termed the 
 tentative efforts of Diocesan Conferences, will suggest, both to those 
 already formed, and to those which may hereafter be formed, the 
 desirableness of method, and also of simultaneous discussion of the 
 same subjects. 
 
 Fragmentary and unsystematic as it is, the Report will show how 
 many important subjects are at this time, and have been for some time 
 past, stirring the minds of these representative assemblages of Clergy 
 and Laity, and, in many instances, the exact direction which their 
 minds have taken. 
 
 a 2 
 
4 
 
 Should the new Convocation determine to appoint a similar Com- 
 mittee of tabulation, it is to be hoped that a more satisfactory result 
 may be obtained. Three Dioceses are to have Conferences in the 
 course of the present year, for the first time. And, perhaps, one, at 
 any rate, of the only three remaining in the Province, London, Llan- 
 daff, and Worcester, may organize a Conference by the year after. 
 
 Only one 'Diocese in the Province of York, that of Durham, is 
 without a Conference. But the Bishop is at this moment making 
 preparations for it. A Conference for the Diocese of Sodor and Man 
 was the most recently established in that Province. 
 
 It would have greatly conduced to the value of such a compilation 
 as the present, if it could have combined with it a Report of a similar 
 nature from the Province of York. This, however, your Committee 
 felt they were not authorised to attempt. 
 
 The subjects treated of have been arranged under four heads : 
 
 1. Religious. 
 
 2. Educational. 
 
 3. Ecclesiastical and Parliamentary. 
 
 4. Social. 
 
 This arrangement is not, perhaps, a complete one, but it is the best 
 which they could frame, considering how frequently the subjects are 
 found to overlap each other, and almost to defy discrimination. 
 
 CHAPTER I. 
 
 RELIGIOUS. 
 
 Diocese. 
 
 Date. 
 
 Subject. 
 
 
 
 Sunday Schools. 
 
 Bangor - - - 
 
 1876 
 
 Diocesan system of Sunday School Teaching 
 
 
 discussed. 
 
 Salisbury - - 
 
 1878 
 
 Sunday School Union desirable. 
 
 Peterborough - 
 
 1879 
 
 That a permanent Diocesan Committee on 
 
 
 Sunday Schools be established. 
 
 St. Albans - - 
 
 1879 
 
 Committee to consider work of Sunday 
 
 
 
 Schools formed. 
 
 Truro - - - 
 
 1879 
 
 Report of Committee received and adopted. 
 
 Canterbury - - 
 
 1879 
 
 Subject set down for discussion. 
 
5 
 
 Diocese. 
 
 Date. 
 
 Subject. 
 
 
 
 Children's Services. 
 
 Salisbury - - 
 Bangor - - - 
 
 1879 
 1879 
 
 " That Special Service wherever possible, 
 form part of the Church's Sunday Ser- 
 vice." Motion carried nem. con. 
 Both Houses of Convocation petitioned 
 
 Importance of Children's Services and best 
 mode of conducting them. 
 
 U11C1 LUI ICO. 
 
 Salisbury - - 
 Exeter - - - 
 
 1873 
 1873 
 
 " That it is much to be wished that in all 
 churches the Offertory should be a regular 
 part of the worship." Carried nem. con. 
 
 That special attention be directed to period- 
 ical use of Offertory. 
 
 Winchester- - 
 Truro - - - 
 
 1879 
 1879 
 
 Baptism. 
 
 That the neglect of Holy Baptism be re- 
 medied. 
 
 Registration of Baptisms and Burial?. 
 Amendment of Forms at present in use 
 referred to a Committee. 
 
 Confession. 
 
 Winchester - 
 
 1877 
 
 " That the Members of this Conference who 
 have read either the book or extracts 
 from it disapprove the use of such books 
 respecting Confession as from the extracts 
 read in the House of Lords ' The Priest 
 in Absolution ' appears to be." 
 
 Confession (habitual and systematic) " in 
 consistent with the Doctrine and Disci- 
 pline of Church of England." 
 
 Ely - - - - 
 
 1870 
 
 Church Hymnology. 
 
 Hoped that Convocation would apppoint a 
 General Hymnal. 
 
6 
 
 1879 
 1879 
 
 1879 
 1879 
 1879 
 
 1876 
 
 1874 
 1873 
 
 1875 
 
 1879 
 1871 
 
 Lords' Day Observance. 
 
 The duty of promoting the better observance 
 of the Lord's Day enforced. 
 Petition to close Public Houses. Cf. 
 " Temperance." 
 
 Promotion of Observance, respect being 
 had to permitted recreation. 
 
 " That this Synod is opposed to opening of 
 Museums : as hard on attendants, calcu- 
 lated to weaken respect for sanctity of 
 the Day, and lessen number of wor- 
 shippers." 
 
 Carried. This, a second amendment, took 
 the place of first amendment, and though 
 not put as a substantive motion, it was 
 understood that the Synod accepted it. 
 
 Cf. " Temperance." 
 
 Sunday closing. Cf. " Temperance." 
 
 That a Committee be appointed to consider 
 the question of Sunday Leisure. 
 
 Mission Services. 
 
 The best and least expensive way of sup- 
 porting the Home and Foreign Missions 
 of the Church considered. 
 
 Mission Services considered as means to pro- 
 mote the interests of the Church in Wales. 
 
 Diocesan Board of Missions appointed to 
 promote interest, but not to collect money. 
 
 Parochial Missions. 
 
 Parochial Missions, Brotherhoods, and Asso- 
 ciations of Church Workers. Discussed. 
 
 Parochial Missions to be encouraged. 
 
 Committee on Special Missions appointed 
 which has continued ever since. 
 
 Foreign Missions. 
 
 That frequent and full information respecting 
 Foreign Missions be given in the several 
 parishes. 
 
7 
 
 Bangor - 
 
 Winchester • - 
 Peterborough - 
 
 Ely - - - - 
 
 Bangor 
 
 Lincoln 
 
 1X7;- 
 
 1878 
 1879 
 
 1872 
 
 1873 
 1877 
 
 1877 
 
 1879 
 1876 
 
 Foreign Missions— continued. 
 
 A Paper, by Rev. R. W. Griffith, was read 
 on this subject, but no resolution was 
 passed. 
 
 i. That a Diocesan Board of Home and 
 Foreign Missions would give impulse to 
 the work. 
 
 ii. Weekly collections for Home and Foreign 
 Missions proposed. 
 
 Home Reunions. 
 
 That the work of the " Home Reunion So- 
 ciety," deserves support. 
 
 That efforts be made for a possible concordat 
 with Wesleyans. 
 
 Readers, Catechists, &c. 
 
 That it is undesirable that Laymen should 
 preach in consecrated buildings or places, 
 or in buildings licensed as temporary 
 churches. 
 
 Resolution " in favour of services of Lay- 
 men being enlisted as Evangelists, Readers, 
 Catechists, and Teachers, under sanction 
 of the Bishop on nomination of the clergy 
 for buildings other than the above." 
 
 Subject : How to enlist the co-operaticn of 
 the Laity in Church work. 
 
 Subject: Best method of securing and ex- 
 tending the co-operation of Laymen in 
 practical Church work. 
 
 That a body of Preachers and Evangelists, 
 Clerical and Lay, is needed for special 
 work in the Diocese. 
 
 The duty of the faithful Laity to undertake 
 their due share in the work of the Church. 
 
 " That it is the opinion of this Conference 
 that it is desirable that, under proper 
 safeguards, duly qualified Laymen of the 
 Church of England should be invited and 
 authorised by the Bishop of the Diocese 
 
8 
 
 Diocese. 
 
 Date. 
 
 Subject. 
 
 
 
 Readers, Catechists, &c. — continued. 
 
 
 
 to conduct religious services, other than 
 or distinct from the administration of 
 the Sacraments, in unconsecrated and 
 also, under certain circumstances, in con- 
 secrated places of worship." 
 Carried by a majority of 40. 
 
 Winchester 
 
 1878 
 
 Deaconesses. 
 
 Employment of Deaconesses under Episco- 
 pal supervision advisable. 
 
 Preaching. 
 
 Winchester 
 
 1879 
 
 The promotion of efficiency in the system of 
 preaching considered. 
 
 Draft Bill (Book of Common Prayer). 
 
 Ely - 
 
 Oxford - - - 
 
 Norwich - - 
 Lichfield - - 
 (Archidiaconal) 
 
 Salisbury - - 
 Chichester - - 
 
 1878 
 1878 
 
 1879 
 1879 
 
 1879 
 1879 
 
 General approval of the Draft Bill discussed 
 in Lower House of Convocation of Canter- 
 bury, May 14, 1878. 
 
 Clauses 4 to 8 of Draft Bill approved by 
 Lower House, May 14, 1878 ; recom- 
 mended to favourable consideration of 
 Upper House. 
 
 Open to grave objections. 
 
 Salop Archidiaconal : — Clergy support. 
 Laity condemn. 
 
 Stafford Archidiaconal : — Clergy support. 
 Laity condemn. 
 
 Derby Archidiaconal : — " Parliamentary le- 
 gislation with regard to the Prayer Book 
 is not desirable." 
 
 Principles of Bill approved. 
 
 " Most unwise to make such an alteration in 
 the way in which matters Ecclesiastical 
 are now brought before the House of Com- 
 mons, viz., by a direct Bill." 
 Carried by a large majority. 
 
9 
 
 Diocese. 
 
 Date. 
 
 Subject. 
 
 Lincoln - - - 
 
 1879 
 
 Draft Bill (Book of Common Prayer)— cont. 
 
 "That this Conference approves the Draft 
 Bill for providing facilities for the amend- 
 ment from time to time of the Rites and 
 Ceremonies of the Church of England, 
 and concurs in the action of Convocation 
 in not inviting the sanction of Parliament 
 to any proposals for amending the 
 Rubrics of the Prayer-book until some 
 Bill of such a character shall have become 
 law." 
 
 Not carried. 
 
 Amendment, ''■ That it is not expedient to 
 bring this Draft Bill before Parliament 
 until the Lower House of Canterbury has 
 been reformed. 
 
 The Amendment was carried by a 
 majority of 3. 
 
 
 
 
 
 CHAPTER II. 
 
 
 EDUCATIONAL. 
 
 Diocese. 
 
 Date. 
 
 Subject. 
 
 Bangor - - - 
 
 Ely - - - - 
 
 Chichester - - 
 
 Truro - - - 
 
 1873 
 
 1871 
 1877 
 
 1879 
 
 Diocesan Inspection. 
 
 Proposed to appoint a paid Diocesan In- 
 spector. 
 
 That paid Inspectors be appointed. 
 
 That a Prize scheme would facilitate the 
 work of the Diocesan Inspector. 
 
 Report of Committee on Religious In- 
 struction received and adopted. 
 
 Exeter - - - 
 
 1878 
 
 Examination of Pupil Teachers. 
 
 Pupil Teachers in Training Schools, in- 
 creased attempts to be made to induce 
 them to undergo the annual Diocesan 
 Examination in Religious Subjects, lie- 
 solution in favour passed. 
 
10 
 
 Diocese. 
 
 Date. 
 
 Subject. 
 
 Exeter - - - 
 
 1875 
 
 Examination of Board School Children. 
 
 Periodical examination of children in Board 
 Schools in knowledge of Scripture and 
 duties of Christian Life. 
 
 Exeter - - - 
 
 1875 
 
 Conscience Clause. 
 
 The Cowper-Temple Clause to be so modified 
 as to allow instruction in Catechism and 
 Forms of Church of England, due regard 
 being paid to Conscience Clause. 
 
 Ely - - - - 
 
 1871 
 
 Training Colleges. 
 
 Resolution in favour of giving every support 
 to the above. 
 
 Chichester - - 
 
 1879 
 
 School Managers and Teachers' Associa- 
 tion. 
 
 That a Committee be appointed to form the 
 above. 
 
 Salisbury - - 
 Chichester - - 
 
 1877 
 1879 
 
 Middle-Class Schools. 
 
 Committee reported fully on Secular Educa- 
 tion in the Diocese. 
 Committee be appointed to consider grants 
 to start the above. 
 
 Lincoln - - - 
 Chichester - - 
 
 Bangor - - - 
 
 1875 
 1877 
 
 1878 
 1875 
 
 Voluntary Schools. 
 
 Religious Training in National Elementary 
 Schools. Discussed. 
 
 That an effort be made " to assist to the 
 utmost Voluntary Schools while recognis- 
 ing the good intentions of the framers of 
 the Education Act, 1876, towards Volun- 
 tary Schools." 
 
 That a fund be raised to secure a grant from 
 National Society to aid struggling Schools. 
 
 That where Board Schools exist, Denomina- 
 tional Schools ought to share the rates 
 levied by them, and Parliament should 
 restrict the rate. 
 
11 
 
 Bangor - - 
 Lincoln - - 
 
 Ely - 
 
 Oxford 
 
 St. Albans 
 
 Lichfield - - 
 (Derby Archi- 
 diaconal) 
 
 Lincoln 
 
 Date. 
 
 1873 
 1878 
 
 1876 
 1879 
 
 1879 
 1875 
 
 1879 
 
 1872 
 
 Voluntary Schools— continued. 
 
 Paper " On best means of maintaining the 
 religious character and efficiency of our 
 National Schools." 
 
 "That this Conference views with appre- 
 hension any proposal to transfer Parochial 
 Schools to School Boards, and pledges 
 itself to use its efforts to maintain the 
 religious character of Parochial Schools 
 in accordance with the doctrines of the 
 Church of England." 
 
 Carried with only one dissentient. 
 
 Deserving of support. 
 
 Churchmen, where a School Board is immi- 
 nent, recommended to take counsel with 
 Nonconformist bodies in their parishes to 
 secure funds for support of Voluntary 
 Education, without agency of a School 
 Board. Resolution carried. 
 
 Justice for Voluntary Schools, same as 
 Bangor, 1875, .Re-Share of Rate, see page 9. 
 
 " Where no School Boards exist, the Volun- 
 tary System be aided by more direct 
 legislative assistance than at present 
 exists for regularity of attendance." 
 
 " Special efforts be made to support Church 
 Schools." 
 
 The Endowed Schools Act. 
 
 That the Endowed Schools Act of 1869 
 needs revision and amendment, and that 
 the Schemes which have been or may be 
 put forth by the Commissioners, acting 
 under the Statute for Endowed Schools 
 in this Diocese ought to be carefully 
 examined, so that they may be in ac- 
 cordance with the designs of the founders 
 of these Schools, especially for the main- 
 tenance of a sound religious education ; 
 that a Committee be appointed to con- 
 sider and report on such Acts, and on 
 
12 
 
 Exeter - - 
 Oxford - - 
 
 Lichfield - - 
 (Derby Archi- 
 diaconal) 
 
 Chichester - 
 
 1875 
 1875 
 
 1879 
 
 1877 
 
 The Endowed Schools Act— continued, 
 
 such Schemes before the beginning of the 
 next Session of Parliament." 
 
 Carried ; and Report of the Committee 
 was presented to the Conference. 
 
 Education Act. 
 
 Cf. Conscience clause page 9. 
 
 " That 14th Section of Elementary Educa- 
 tion Act is repugnant to the principle of 
 religious liberty." Carried almost unani- 
 mously. 
 
 Satisfaction recorded at the general prin- 
 ciples laid down by Act of 1876 ; need in- 
 sisted on of all help to carry out the pro- 
 visions of the Act. 
 
 Grave injustice and infraction of religious 
 liberty involved in operation of Education 
 Acts, when a Rate, &c. same as Bangor, 
 1875, re Rate, see page 9. 
 
 That the Clergy endeavour to guide the 
 action of the Acts where there is a co- 
 existence of Church and Board Schools, 
 and that special efforts be made for sup- 
 port of Church Schools. 
 
 That the Act of 1876 is the most practical 
 form of legislation that can be adopted at 
 the present time. This resolution of 
 Mr. Grantham was amended in the 
 following manner, and was then put and 
 carried : 
 
 "That this Conference, while recognising 
 the good intentions of the framers of the 
 Education Act, 1876, towards Voluntary 
 Schools, and acknowledging the assistance 
 then given to them, considers it to be the 
 duty of the ministers of the Church of 
 England to assist to the utmost in the 
 working of the above, combining with 
 Secular instruction, however pure, Re- 
 ligious teaching." 
 
13 
 
 CHAPTER III. 
 ECCLESIASTICAL AND PARLIAMENTARY 
 
 Ely 
 
 Salisbury - - 
 
 Oxford - - - 
 Oxford - - - 
 
 Lichfield - - 
 (Stafford and 
 Stoke Archi- 
 diaconal) 
 Lincoln - - • 
 
 1874 
 1877 
 1877 
 1879 
 
 1879 
 
 Reform of Convocation. 
 
 That whilst, in order to secure to Convoca- 
 tion a just influence upon the Church at 
 large it is desirable that the number of 
 parochial proctors should be increased, it 
 is not less desirable that Parliament and 
 Convocation should have the means of 
 ascertaining the opinion of the Church 
 collectively. . . . Diocesan Conferences 
 will further this end, the constitution of 
 the Convocation as by law established 
 remaining unaltered. 
 
 Reform of Convocation by better represen- 
 tation of Parochial Clergy. Petition to 
 Convocation proposed and carried. 
 
 Resolved : Reform of Convocation necessary 
 for dealing with Rubrical Laws and Canons 
 and Ecclesiastical disputes. 
 
 Parliament to be petitioned to give proper 
 constitutional weight to Convocation on 
 questions of Doctrine. 
 
 Increase of Proctors for Parochial Clergy, 
 and power of voting for these to be ex- 
 tended to Curates in charge. 
 
 Petition to Archbishop of Canterbury. 
 
 Two Proctors for each Archdeaconry through- 
 out the province. 
 
 Resolution carried by whole House. 
 
 a. That the Reform of Convocation is a 
 pressing question at the present time. 
 
 b. That the number of Proctors for the 
 Parochial Clergy should be largely in- 
 creased. 
 
 c. That all such Proctors should be elected 
 in one and the same manner in every 
 
1 1 
 
 Diocese. 
 
 Date. 
 
 Subject. 
 
 
 
 Reform of Convocation— continued. 
 
 
 
 Diocese — i. e., directly and freely by 
 Archdeaconries— and that the proportion 
 should be regulated according to the 
 number of Clergy in each Archdeaconry. 
 
 d. That such suggested increase in the 
 number of Proctors for the Parochial 
 Clergy can be effected by the Archbishop 
 of Canterbury as Metropolitan acting 
 with the assent of his Suffragans and 
 upon the advice of his Synod. 
 
 e. That all persons in Priest's Orders, hold- 
 ing the Bishop's Licence, should be 
 admitted to vote in the election of Proctors 
 for the Parochial Clergy. 
 
 Carried. 
 
 "That a body of Laymen should be formed 
 by means of the votes of the Lay Mem- 
 bers of the different Diocesan Confer- 
 ences to deliberate on Ecclesiastical Ques- 
 tions, and to confer with Convocation 
 upon them." 
 Carried. 
 
 
 
 Central Conference. 
 
 Oxford - - - 
 Bangor - - - 
 
 1877 
 
 1878 
 1877 
 1878 
 
 To be established, and consist of Delegates 
 
 from Diocesan Conferences. 
 That above be urged on the Archbishop. 
 Restoration of Synodical action desirable. 
 The same. 
 
 Diocesan Conferences. 
 
 Norwich - - 
 
 Truro - - - 
 St. Asapli - - 
 St. Albans - - 
 
 1879 
 
 1879 
 1878 
 1879 
 
 That Committee be appointed to report on 
 
 above. 
 
 Diocesan Committee to be formed. 
 Discussion as to future Diocesan Conference. 
 Scheme of 1870 for a Rochester Annual 
 Conference be adopted in this Diocese. 
 
15 
 
 1879 
 1879 
 
 1870 
 
 1871 
 1874 
 1874 
 
 1873 
 1875 
 
 1876 
 1873 
 
 1877 
 1878 
 
 Ruridecanal Conferences. 
 
 Scheme for above proposed. 
 
 Ruridecanal Conference to be held annually. 
 
 Parochial Councils. 
 
 Frequent consultation with Laity recom- 
 mended, but compulsory council depre- 
 cated. 
 
 Voluntary Parish Councils to be suggested 
 
 by the Bishop. 
 Discussion on Lord Sandon's Parochial 
 
 Councils Bill. 
 Parochial Boards for Christian work and 
 
 Lay co-operation desirable. 
 
 Rights of Laity in Church Government. 
 
 The rights and duties of the Laity as regards 
 the Church. 
 
 Increase of Episcopate. 
 
 Recommended, earnestly. 
 The principle of Lord Lyttleton's Bill ap- 
 proved. 
 
 Petition in favour of Lord Lyttleton's Bill, 
 
 carried nem. con. 
 Earnestly recommended. 
 " That there ought to be an increase of the 
 
 Home Episcopate, and that the Diocese of 
 
 Lincoln ought to be divided." 
 Carried. 
 
 Conge d'Elire Bill. 
 
 Petition against — carried. 
 Same— carried. 
 
 Increase of Church Efficiency. 
 
 Diocesan Spiritual Aid Board appointed, 
 which reports annually. 
 
16 
 
 St. Asaph 
 St, Albans 
 
 St. Alban's 
 Bangor - 
 
 Norwich 
 
 Ely - 
 
 Ely 
 
 Exeter - 
 
 Lincoln 
 
 1878 
 1879 
 
 1879 
 1876 
 
 1879 
 
 1875 
 
 1879 
 
 1878 
 
 Increase of Church Efficiency— continued. 
 Subject discussed. 
 
 Committee formed to promote the spiritual 
 interests of the Diocese. 
 
 Duties of Cathedral Chapters. 
 
 Committee to draw up a scheme for a capi- 
 tular body. 
 
 Discussion on necessary changes in Cathe- 
 dral Chapters to increase their efficiency. 
 
 Augmentation of Small Benefices. 
 
 Report received on above. 
 
 Endowments and Presentations. 
 
 Legislation which should establish the prin- 
 ciple that livings are a trust as well as a 
 property, would be gladly welcomed. 
 
 Hopes Parliament will sanction Church 
 Patronage Bill, whilst regretting the with- 
 drawal of certain important clauses 
 therein. 
 
 Diversity of Patronage, including Lay, of 
 value : yet the scandal through traffic in 
 livings calls for additional restrictions on 
 the action of Patrons. 
 
 Sale of next Presentations to be illegal. 
 
 No person to be presented to a benefice who 
 has not been five years in Orders, or who 
 is above seventy. 
 
 " That, while this Conference cordially recog- 
 nises the benefits arising from the present 
 system of patronage in the Church of 
 England in many respects, it is very de- 
 sirous to see a removal of abuses by which 
 that system is blemished and impaired, 
 and expresses its earnest hope that the 
 
17 
 
 Lichfield 
 (Salop Archi 
 diaconal) 
 Salisbury - 
 
 Oxford - - 
 Salisbury - 
 
 Salisbury - 
 
 Winchester ■ 
 
 Oxford 
 
 1879 
 
 1875 
 1874 
 
 1876 
 
 Endowments and Presentations — continued 
 
 Royal Commission recently appointed may 
 provide a remedy for those abuses, and 
 that all persons or classes of persons in 
 whom Church patronage is vested may 
 administer it as a sacred trust, for the 
 glory of God, the good of His Church, 
 and the spiritual welfare of immortal 
 souls ; and also for the encouragement of 
 a faithful, godly, and learned ministry in 
 the Church of England." — Carried unani- 
 mously. 
 
 All proceedings in sale of advowsons to be 
 public. In illegal transactions, both par- 
 ties to be equally liable. 
 
 That Royal Commission on Sale and Resigt 
 nation of Ecclesiastical Benefices direc- 
 its attention to existing state of law with 
 regard to Donatives. Uniformity in law 
 for all parishes suggested. 
 
 Safeguards against abuse above proposed. 
 
 Petition to Parliament and Convocation to 
 amend laws relating to Simony and Sale 
 of Ecclesiastical Preferments. 
 
 Petition in support of Bishop of Peter- 
 borough's Bill, with amendment to pro- 
 hibit sale of next presentations, and all 
 money bargains in exchange of benefices. 
 
 Attacks on the position and property of the 
 Church to be resisted. 
 
 Ecclesiastical Fees. 
 
 Committee formed to confer with the Bishop 
 and Archdeacons on Ecclesiastical Fees, 
 as settled by Act 30 and 31 Vict., c. 135, 
 to be paid at visitations, with especial 
 reference to the difficulty of payment 
 arising from Compulsory Church Rate 
 Abolition Act, 1868. 
 
 Report adopted, committee further appointed 
 to watch proceedings of Parliament. 
 
18 
 
 Diocese. 
 
 Date. 
 
 Subject. 
 
 
 
 Ecclesiastical Fees— continued. 
 
 Oxford - - - 
 
 1878 
 1879 
 
 Committee of 1875 re-appointed. All 
 
 Ecclesiastical Fees to be investigated. 
 Report of above adopted. 
 
 Salisbury - - 
 
 1872 
 
 Fees for Visitations. Duty of Church- 
 wardens to provide payment, if possible. 
 Carried nem. com. 
 
 Legislative enactment to authorise certain 
 dealings with Church Property by a 
 simpler process than Faculty desirable. 
 
 Carried nem. con. 
 
 Consecration Fees. Law on this subject to 
 be carefully considered. How far can 
 fees sanctioned by 30 and 31 Vict. cap. 
 135 be properly demanded in cases of 
 land adjoining Churchyards as conse- 
 crated under Act 30 and 31 Vict. cap. 
 133 ? (An Act relating to the Conse- 
 cration of Churchyards.) 
 
 Ecclesiastical Dilapidations. 
 
 Salisbury - - 
 
 Winchester- - 
 Lincoln - - - 
 
 1877 
 1878 
 
 1879 
 1876 
 
 Modifications and amendments in the Act 
 
 of 1871 urgently called for. 
 Carried. 
 
 Act of 1871. Amendments specially called 
 for. 
 
 a. Its unfair apportionment of the burden. 
 
 /3. Unsatisfactory Court of Appeal. 
 
 y. Its great cost if carried into effect. 
 Earnest hope expressed to Home Secretary 
 
 that these defects may be remedied. 
 Carried. 
 
 Committee appointed to consider the work- 
 ing of the Ecclesiastical Dilapidations 
 
 Act. 
 
 " That in the opinion of this Conference, the 
 Dilapidation Act of 1872 urgently needs 
 immediate amendment." — Carried unani- 
 mously. 
 
1!) 
 
 Diocese. 
 
 Date. 
 
 Subject. 
 
 
 
 Church and State. 
 
 Oxford - - - 
 
 Bangor - 
 
 Ely - - - - 
 Oxford - - - 
 
 1877 
 
 1875 
 
 1872 
 1876 
 
 Severance of above highly detrimental to 
 
 the best interests of the Nation and 
 
 spiritual welfare of the Church and much 
 
 to be deprecated. 
 Most effective manner of meeting the 
 
 attacks of the Liberation Society in our 
 
 several parishes. 
 Resolution in favour of Church Defence 
 
 Associations. 
 The avowed principles of the Church Defence 
 
 Institution deserve cordial support. 
 
 Attacks on Church Property. 
 
 Winchester - - 
 
 1878 
 
 That attacks on the position and property 
 of the Church of England be resisted. 
 
 Clerical Rating. 
 
 Norwich - - 
 
 1879 
 
 That a Committee be appointed to consider 
 Clerical Rating. 
 
 Free and Open Seats. 
 
 Exeter - - - 
 
 Winchester 
 Salisbury - - 
 
 Truro - - - 
 
 1879 
 
 1878 
 1879 
 
 1879 
 
 Permanent appropriation of seats or pews 
 
 in Churches. 
 Committee appointed. 
 
 Resolution in favour of Free and Open 
 Churches. 
 
 "That every effort should be directed in 
 restoring Churches to make the sittings 
 free, and to arrange that Churches should 
 be kept open for daily use." 
 Rider. — " Sittings in all churches ought to 
 be free and unappropriated, and, where 
 practicable, all churches should be open 
 for daily use." 
 
 Public Worship Regulation Act. 
 
 Lincoln - - - 
 
 1874 
 
 Subject discussed. 
 
20 
 
 Diocese. 
 
 Date. 
 
 Subject. 
 
 
 
 Public Worship Regulation Act— continued. 
 
 Ely 
 
 Salisbury 
 
 1874 
 1879 
 
 a. Opinion of the Conference, that the Bill, 
 as it stood in July, 1874, would be pro- 
 ductive of good results. 
 
 /3. Revision of Rubrics urged in view of pass- 
 ing of the Bill, to remove as far as pos- 
 sible all obscurity, or distinctly allow, 
 within defined limits, diversity of practice. 
 
 Carried by a large majority. 
 
 Public Worship Regulation Act in accord- 
 ance with a recommendation in the 
 Report of the Committee of the Lower 
 House of Convocation. 
 
 Clergy Discipline. 
 
 Ely 
 
 Peterborough - 
 Bangor - 
 
 1878 
 
 1879 
 1877 
 
 The Proctors in Convocation for Ely re- 
 quested to report the views of the Con- 
 ference on Clergy Discipline to Lower 
 House of Convocation. 
 
 Providing costs for enforcing Clergy Dis- 
 cipline. 
 
 Report of Convocation on Clergy Discipline 
 considered. 
 
 Book of Common Prayer. 
 
 Salisbury - - 
 
 1877 
 
 Opinion — " An Eirenicon is to be found for 
 many disorders within the Church, by 
 giving due attention to the method for 
 ' the resolution of doubts which may arise 
 in the use and practice ' of the Services of 
 tli6 Book of Common Pr&yeTj prescribed 
 by the sixth clause in the prefatory direc- 
 tions, ' concerning the Services of the 
 Church.' " 
 
 Carried nem. con. 
 
 Burials Bill, 1871. 
 
 Ely - - - - 
 
 1871 
 
 Protest against, Purchase of Burial Grounds 
 for Nonconformists should receive legal 
 facilities. 
 
21 
 
 Lincoln - - 
 
 Ely - 
 
 Oxford 
 
 Bangor - - 
 
 Exeter 
 
 1877 
 
 1877 
 
 1878 
 1875 
 
 1873 
 
 Burials Bill, 1871 — continued. 
 
 Silent interment with due solemnity in 
 Churchyards to be permitted. 
 
 Opposed to allowing ministers not of the 
 Church of England to perform services 
 in Churchyards, as, if permitted, the 
 bond between Church and State would be 
 weakened. Votes 82 to 16. 
 
 Resolution — " Against the compulsory in- 
 troduction of other Services than those of 
 the Church of England into her burial- 
 grounds." 
 
 113 votes for the Resolution. 
 15 votes against it. 
 
 98 majority in favour of Resolution. 
 
 That Burial Law Amendment Bill does not 
 deserve confidenee. 
 
 Silent interments proposed. Burial-grounds 
 in addition to Churchyards to be provided. 
 On sanitary grounds as well as for the 
 above, Local Government Board should 
 facilitate the cemetery system. 
 
 Nonconformists have no right to require 
 changes in the regulation of Parochial 
 Churchyards. Legal security for orderly 
 use agreeably to the purpose of their 
 foundation otherwise impaired. 
 
 Claim for varying ministration in Church 
 Burial-grounds inadmissible. Silent in- 
 terment not opposed. Additional Burial- 
 grounds desirable. 
 
 1. Church Services alone permitted. 
 Carried. 
 
 2. Shortened service, not to be used over the 
 unbaptized, excommunicated, or suicides. 
 
 Carried. 
 
 3. Silent interments. 
 Negatived. 
 
 4. Facilities for additional Burying-grounds 
 for Nonconformists, &c. 
 
 Resolution passed (with only three dissen- 
 tients) : — " That this Conference, with- 
 
22 
 
 Burials Bill, 1871— continued. 
 
 out denying that some legislation on 
 the subject may be expedient, is yet ap- 
 prehensive that the Burials Bill now 
 before Parliament, unless it undergo 
 some modification before it pass into law, 
 will be productive of a far more serious 
 grievance than that which it seeks to 
 remove." 
 
 A motion that it would be right to allow 
 Nonconformist Ministers to hold burial 
 services in Churches was rejected by an 
 overwhelming majority. 
 
 1876 Extension of Public Cemeteries the best 
 means for State to provide for Burials. 
 
 1877 i. That Lord Harrowby's enactment is to be 
 deprecated. 
 
 . Parliament to provide Public Cemeteries. 
 1879 Petition against other Services in Church- 
 yards than those of duly ordained Min- 
 isters. 
 
 1878 Identical, by a very large majority. 
 
 1877 Nem. con. identical. 
 
 1879 Petition for greater facilities for closing 
 Churchyards and providing Cemeteries. 
 
 1878 Identical. 
 
 1877 Public Cemeteries be provided. 
 
 1879 Inquiry into state of Churchyards, and to 
 insure the application of the Public Inter- 
 ments Act of 1879. 
 
 Discussion on proposed alteration in the 
 Law of Burial in its relation to Non- 
 conformists and its bearing on the Clergy. 
 
 Funeral Reform. 
 
 1875 Care of churchyards and cemeteries; Me- 
 morials of the Dead, &c. 
 Discussed. 
 
 1877 
 1878 
 
 Deceased Wife's Sister. 
 
 Petition against the Bill. 
 Identical. 
 
23 
 
 Diocese. 
 
 Date. 
 
 Subject. 
 
 
 
 Deceased Wife's Sister— continued. 
 
 Salisbury - - 
 Ely - - - - 
 
 1879 
 1879 
 
 Identical. 
 
 Opposed to the Bill as a measure for which 
 there is no real necessity. Tendency to 
 demoralise our social and domestic re- 
 lations. 
 
 Matters Pcirli&niGn tciry t 
 
 Salisbury 
 Norwich - - 
 
 1871 
 1879 
 
 Committee appointed on matters Parliament- 
 ary, which reports annually. 
 
 Committee appointed to report on matters 
 Parliamentary. 
 
 
 
 CHAPTEK IV. 
 
 
 
 qnPT at 
 
 Diocese. 
 
 Date. 
 
 Subject. 
 
 
 
 Temperance (34). 
 
 Chichester - - 
 Bangor - 
 
 1877 
 
 1878 
 1874 
 
 " That branches of the Church of England 
 Temperance Society be formed." 
 
 " That a Clerical Secretary be provided." 
 
 " Diocesan Branch of Temperance Society 
 be formed." 
 
 " Two Representatives be sent to the Parent 
 Society." 
 
 " That the rule of the ' Juvenile Manual ' 
 which requires all children to be entered as 
 abstainers is inconsistent with other parts 
 of the Parent Society's programme." 
 
 " That all the methods of Parent Society are 
 not accepted." 
 
 " The Temperance Movement in relation to 
 the Church." 
 
 " That a Diocesan Society be formed of 
 C.E.T.S. with Banches in every Deanery 
 and Parish where desirable." 
 
 Carried. 
 
24 
 
 Temperance — continued. 
 
 Oxford - - - 1876 " Landowners and Employers of Labour 
 recommended to adopt the principle of 
 substitutes to counteract intemperance 
 amongst the Labouring Classes." 
 Salisbury - - 1877 Diocesan Temperance Board established. 
 Salisbury - - 1879 " Amendment of Laws of Liquor Traffic." 
 
 " Amendment of Laws as to off-licences." 
 " That a Memorial to Home Secretary be 
 
 presented on the above." 
 Carried. 
 
 Norwich- - - 1879 Report from Committee on subjects relating 
 to Church of England Temperance Society. 
 Received. 
 
 Truro - - - 1879 Report of Committee on Intemperance re- 
 ceived and adopted. 
 
 Ely - - - - 1871 Resolution passed in favour of the early 
 closing of Public-houses and limited hours 
 on Sundays. 
 
 Peterborough - 1879 On Sunday Closing : " That Public-houses 
 be opened for one hour only twice a day 
 on Sundays." This Resolution was ad- 
 journed to the next Conference. 
 
 Oxford - - - 1878 Conference to petition Parliament to close 
 Public-houses on Sundays or to shorten 
 hours. 
 
 Lichfield - - 1879 "That the President be requested to sign 
 (Stafford and on behalf of this Conference, for presenta- 
 
 Stoke Archi- tion to Parliament, a Petition in favour of 
 
 diaconal) the Bill for Closing Public Houses on 
 
 Sundays, except for an hour at dinner and 
 an hour at supper ; but no liquor to be 
 drank on the premises." Resolution by 
 the whole House." 
 Lincoln- - - 1879 "That this Conference approves the prin- 
 ciples of the Church of England Tem- 
 perance Society, and considers it most 
 desirable that a branch of it should be 
 established in every parish in the dio- 
 cese." 
 Carried. 
 
25 
 
 Diocese. 
 
 Date. 
 
 Subject. 
 
 
 
 Opium Trade. 
 
 Salisbury 
 
 1 Q70 
 10/ o 
 
 That it is expedient for the nation, at 
 whatever cost, to free itself from all 
 Government connection with the Opium 
 Trade." Petition to Houses of Parliament. 
 
 Degradation of Women. 
 
 Lichfield - - 
 (Stafford, Stoke, 
 and Derby 
 Archidiaconal) 
 
 1879 
 
 " That a Committee be appointed to report 
 upon the efforts already made within or 
 beyond the Diocese for the Prevention of 
 the Degradation of Women, or to recover 
 the fallen, and to suggest measures, &c." 
 
 Carried by the whole House. 
 
 Public Health. 
 
 Oxford - - - 
 Lichfield - - 
 
 1876 
 
 1879 
 1879 
 
 That the defective house accommodation and 
 other sanitary conditions of the labourers 
 in our towns and villages are detrimental 
 to physical health, moral and religious in- 
 terests, and social progress of the people. 
 
 Remedy: — Additional legislative power. 
 Committee to promote this remedy. 
 
 Report of above Committee received and 
 adopted. 
 
 Paper read on the Interments Act. No re- 
 solutions. 
 
 Labour and Capital and the Church. 
 
 Lincoln - - - 
 Lichfield - - 
 
 Ely - - - - 
 
 1873 
 1879 
 
 1874 
 
 Subject of Labour and Capital. Discussed. 
 
 Paper read on relation of Church to work- 
 ing men. No resolutions. 
 
 That the Church as a Spiritual Body cannot 
 interfere in disputes as to labour and 
 capital. 
 
 Thrift. 
 
 Peterborough - 
 Chichester - - 
 
 1879 
 ' 1879 
 
 " Benefit Clubs to the interest equally of 
 Landlord, Tenant, and Labourer." 
 
 " That it is the duty of the Church to en- 
 courage Thrift." 
 
26 
 
 Winchester - 
 Oxford - - 
 
 Lincoln - - 
 
 Oxford 
 
 Winchester ■ 
 
 Bangor 
 
 Truro 
 Ely - 
 
 1879 
 1876 
 
 1874 
 
 1878 
 1879 
 1879 
 
 1875 
 1879 
 
 1879 
 
 Thrift — continued. 
 
 " That the subject of " National Insurance" 
 
 is deserving of consideration." 
 Duty of Church (same as Chichester, 1879). 
 
 Agricultural Children's Act. 
 
 Subject discussed. 
 
 Friendly Societies. 
 
 " That recognising the very valuable work 
 already carried out by the Friendly Society 
 for Girls, this Conference recommends that 
 a Friendly Society be established for work 
 among young men and boys in towns and 
 villages for their spiritual and moral advan- 
 tages." Carried. 
 
 Committee appointed to consider best method 
 of keeping a hold on the youth of both 
 sexes after leaving school. 
 
 Committee empowered to take steps for 
 establishing a Young Men's Union for 
 the Diocese. 
 
 That it is desirable that a branch of the 
 Boys' Friendly Society should be estab- 
 lished for the Diocese of Winchester 
 generally, with a local branch in each 
 deanery, and that a Committee be ap- 
 pointed to take steps accordingly. 
 
 How best to retain young men in the Com- 
 munion of the Church after Confirmation. 
 
 The best method of retaining the young, 
 after they have left our day schools, in the 
 Communion of the Church. 
 
 " That it is desirable to form a branch of the 
 Young Men's Friendly Society." 
 
 Carried unanimously. 
 
 Religious societies, especially for the young, 
 recommended. 
 
 Signed, as ordered at a Meeting, June 2, 1880, 
 J. A. HESSEY, D.C.L , 
 
 Archdeacon of Middlesex, 
 Chain 
 
•27 
 
 RESOLUTIONS TO BE MOVED WHEN THIS REPORT IS 
 BROUGHT UP. 
 
 1. That this Report be presented to the Upper House, with the 
 request that His Grace the President will communicate it to the 
 President of the Northern Convocation. 
 
 2. That the Committee be directed to prepare a similar Report, 
 and bring it before the House at the beginning of 1881. 
 
LOWER HOUSE OF CONVOCATION, 
 PROVINCE OF CANTERBURY. 
 
 REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE* ON INTERCOMMUNION 
 WITH THE EASTERN ORTHODOX CHURCHES. 
 
 The Committee on Intercommunion with the Eastern Orthodox 
 Churches presented in the Session of July, 1876, a Report to the 
 Lower House. 
 
 That Report contained an historical review of the events connected 
 with Intercommunion subsequent to the Report of 1874, and a 
 doctrinal review of certain of the documents on that subject which 
 had appeared during that period. 
 
 The historical review embraced the results of the General Conven- 
 tion of the Protestant Episcopal Church of the United States, and of 
 two Conferences held at Bonn between members of the Eastern 
 Church, the Old Catholics, and members of the Anglican Com- 
 munion. 
 
 The doctrinal review included certain dogmatic propositions agreed 
 to by a Committee appointed at the Conference at Bonn in 1875. 
 
 In the Session of the Lower House of Convocation on the 15th of 
 February, 1876, and in that of the Upper House on the 16th of 
 February in the same year, resolutions were passed referring those 
 propositions to the Committee of the Lower House of Convocation. 
 
 The Committee acted upon those resolutions, and examined the 
 doctrinal documents put forth at the Conference at Bonn and the 
 preliminary resolutions adopted at it. They also recorded again cer- 
 tain practical considerations in regard to Intercommunion, adopted in 
 
 Report to Convocation in 1869. 
 
 * Committee. 
 The Prolocutor (Dr. Bickcrsteth). 
 The Archdeacon of Gloucester (Sir J. Prernst). 
 
 „ Oakham (Lord Ahvync 
 
 Compton). 
 „ Sarum (Mr. Lear). 
 
 „ Lewes (Dr. Hannah). 
 
 Dr. Jehb. 
 Mr. Campion. 
 [121] 
 
 Prebendary Joyce 
 
 „ Edwards. 
 Mr. Pigott. 
 Canon Perry. 
 
 Butler. 
 Mr. Bree. 
 Mr. Sadler. 
 
 Mr. Yard (Chairman). 
 
2 
 
 REPORT ON INTERCOMMUNION WITH 
 
 Since the last Report of the Committee was presented to Convocation 
 the Committee have lost the valuable services of the late learned Dr. 
 Fraser, their Chairman, whose elaborate and careful examination of 
 the doctrinal statements of the Bonn Conference are recorded in the 
 Report of 1876, and will remain a valuable addition to the records of 
 Convocation.* 
 
 On Thursday, October 20, 1878, the Committee met under the new 
 chairman, Canon Yard, in Oxford, when it was resolved that, as the 
 Committee in their Report of 1876 gave an historical review of the 
 progress of Intercommunion, referring especially to the General Con- 
 vention of the Protestant Episcopal Church of the United States and 
 to the Conference held at Bonn, the Committee shall proceed to follow 
 up the history of what has been done since the presentation of the 
 last Report in 1876. The next Report to include : 1 . Historical sum- 
 mary of proceedings since the last Report. 2. Any summary of 
 matters in preceding Reports leading up to the Resolutions recorded 
 in the last Report of 1876.f As no Conference was held at Bonn in 
 1876 the Committee have nothing to record respecting proceedings 
 there. 
 
 The Committee desire to record their sense of the loss which the 
 cause of Intercommunion with the orthodox Churches of the East has 
 sustained by the decease of Archbishop Lycurgus, on the 16th of 
 October (O.S.), 1875 — a loss still far greater to the Hellenic race and 
 Church. His labours at the Conference of Bonn in 1875 (where his influ- 
 ence was so great) probably accelerated the symptoms of the disease 
 under which he sank. His memory will long live in the Hellenic 
 Church, and, shall it not be added, in the Anglican Communion, in 
 which he was valued, respected, admired, loved. Perhaps none in his 
 generation has done more to bring about good feeling between the 
 orthodox Eastern Churches and the Anglican Church, and to pro- 
 mote intercommunion between them. 
 
 It may be well in noticing the progress towards intercommunion 
 between those Churches to record the following words of the Regius 
 Professor of Hebrew in Oxford in his work on " the Office of the 
 English Church" : 
 
 " The authorities of the Great Russian Church . . . look favourably 
 on the wish for restored communion. Our position gives us an advan- 
 tage towards her also, because whilst we are widespread enough to be 
 no object of contempt there can be no dread on either side of any 
 interference with the self-government of each in the portion of God's 
 heritage which in His providence each occupies. We have no ground 
 to fear in regard to her lest she should force back upon us that vast 
 practical system, still prevalent in the Western Church, which was 
 one occasion, and is the justification, of our isolated condition. . . . 
 We should have nothing to ask of her except communion." 
 
 * In May, 1878, the Committee met and appointed a new Chairman, 
 f This second summary has been already sufficiently given in the statement! 
 made above in respect to the " historical summary." 
 
THE EASTERN ORTHODOX CHUHI HBS. 
 
 3 
 
 From a correspondence in the 22nd Report of the Anglo-Con- 
 tinental Society it .appears that the desire for unity between the 
 Eastern Church and those of our own communion is growing, and 
 that certain movements among Christian communities are not unlikely 
 to prove links between those Churches. 
 
 One supposed difficulty in the way of Intercommunion, viz. the 
 alleged dependence of the Eastern Church on worldly influence, is 
 denied on the authority of the Catechism of that Church. Another 
 difficulty lies in the differences of opinion avowed by the Clergy and 
 Laity of the Anglican communion ; and, although such differences 
 may not apply to the essentials of the faith, yet it is to be lamented 
 that they do exist among us, presenting obstacles to unity. 
 
 There are promising symptoms in the condition of the Eastern 
 Churches, e. g. in the desire and efforts to bring about more learning 
 among the Clergy, more enlightenment in the Laity, better acquaint- 
 ance with Holy Scripture, and with the writings of the Fathers ; in the 
 suggestions made in the Greek Church for the increase of theological 
 colleges; in the publication of Bibles, Commentaries, and Homilies. 
 Efforts have been made for a reconciliation between Christian 
 Churches in the East, e. g. between the Greeks and Bulgarians and 
 the Latin Armenians, and for the reunion of the Armenians of the 
 Old National Church with the orthodox Eastern Church. The desire 
 for this reunion is growing steadily. There have been interchanges of 
 courtesy, Christian charity, and of religious offices between Greeks and 
 Armenians. What might have proved an insurmountable bar to 
 Intercommunion with the Armenian Church, viz. the Monophysite 
 heresy, is denied by that Church. The want of information on the 
 English Church, so prevalent in the East, is a great obstacle in the 
 way of reunion with us, but great efforts are made to remove this. 
 It is to be hoped that no mistaken, however well-meant, efforts on 
 the part of the English communion to encourage secession, such as 
 have sometimes been attempted, will hinder such reunion. 
 
 The acquisition of the Island of Cyprus by the English, following 
 upon the Treaty of Berlin, has presented a new channel of communica- 
 tion, and it may be hoped, under the providence and grace of God, 
 of Intercommunion, with the Greek Church. 
 
 The Bishop of Gibraltar, under whose ecclesiastical supervision 
 British congregations in Cyprus are placed, lately visited Cyprus, and 
 shortly after his arrival the Greek Archdeacon of Nicosia waited upon 
 him to arrange a time when the Bishop should receive the Archbishop 
 of Cyprus. The Bishop of Gibraltar, however, called first upon the 
 Archbishop, who with his priests received the Bishop, and welcomed 
 him. 
 
 The purpose of the Bishop's visit was to present to the Archbishop 
 of Cyprus a letter from the Archbishop of Canterbury. There were 
 mutual expressions of good will and brotherly feeling between the 
 two prelates. 
 
4 
 
 REPORT ON INTERCOMMUNION WITH 
 
 The Bishop of Gibraltar in a pastoral deprecates interference with 
 the Christian Churches now in the Island of Cyprus, consents to the 
 distribution of copies of the New Testament in mocfern Greek (which he 
 believes would not be objected to by Greek Bishops), and recognizes his 
 appointment as one made with a view to friendly relations between the 
 Anglican and Oriental Churches, and his position in Cyprus as cal- 
 culated to promote this. It is desirable that Convocation should act 
 through him in formulating some concordat with the Greek prelates 
 there. 
 
 The Society for the Propagation of the Gospel has been requested 
 to provide for the ministrations of religion and the celebration of 
 divine worship among the subjects of the British Crown in Cyprus, 
 and has appealed for a special fund for this purpose. The appeal has 
 the sanction of the Bishop of Gibraltar. 
 
 A chaplain has now been selected for the English residents in 
 Cyprus; he will of course be under the Bishop of Gibraltar, and goes 
 with commendatory letters from English Bishops. 
 
 In reference to the distribution of copies of the New Testament 
 suggested by the Bishop of Gibraltar, the Committee take the oppor- 
 tunity of representing to Convocation the importance of addressing 
 the Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge on the subject of 
 translations, especially of the Prayer Book of the English Church. It 
 appears from a communication received by the Chairman of the Com- 
 mittee from the Bishop of Lincoln, Dr. Wordsworth, that " much 
 mischief has been done by bad translations of our Prayer Book, and 
 also of the New Testament, into a vulgar dialect of bad Bomaic." 
 " All the Church books," he states, " of the modern Greeks are in 
 Hellenic, or rather in Hellenistic ; and we should put our Prayer 
 Book and the New Testament into a false and degrading position by 
 our versions of these into Romaic." 
 
 The Bishop of Lincoln suggests that the Society for Promoting 
 Christian Knowledge should print in extenso the eighth Canon of the 
 Third General Council, that of Ephesus, on the avrovofita of the 
 Cyprian Church. 
 
 The Committee venture to follow up these few historical notices 
 with the suggestions which follow : 
 
 That in all aims and efforts at Intercommunion with other Churches 
 there shall be no uncatholic interference with them. 
 
 That no Anglican Bishop shall invade the rights of other Provinces, 
 but that these shall be preserved pure and uninjured according to the 
 customs which have prevailed in those Churches. 
 
 That no sacred offices shall be undertaken by any Bishop, Priest, or 
 Deacon of the Anglican communion except by agreement with the 
 Bishops of such Provinces. 
 
 That in any such agreement the Anglican Church shall not be 
 compromised in matters of fundamental doctrine or primitive practice, 
 and that no just offence be given to members of the Anglican Com- 
 
THE EASTERN ORTHODOX CHURCHES. 
 
 5 
 
 munion, nor any agreement made which shall necessarily hinder 
 future and further Intercommunion with the Eastern or Western 
 Churches. 
 
 The Committee think it well to repeat a statement made in the 
 Report of July 4, 1868, and recorded again in that of July, 1876, that 
 " Intercommunion is not . . . the fusion of one Church into another; this 
 is no question of submitting our Church to the authority of the 
 orthodox Church of the East, or requiring such submission from her. 
 Neither is it, on the one hand, to engraft into our own Church any of 
 the doctrines, rites, or ceremonies peculiar to other Churches, nor, on 
 the other hand, to require them to abandon what may seem to us super- 
 fluous, and to conform themselves to the measure of our simplicity. 
 The Intercommunion which we seek is simply the mutual acknow- 
 ledgment that all Churches which are one in the possession of a true 
 episcopate, one in sacraments, and one in their creed, are by their 
 union in their common Lord bound to receive one another to full com- 
 munion in prayer and sacraments as members of the same household 
 of faith." 
 
 If no other advantage were gained by present efforts to bring about 
 Intercommunion, there is great gain in the removal of ignorance 
 prejudice, and sometimes contempt of others, by increased intercourse 
 with other Churches. 
 
 Reunion with other Churches existing under different secular juris- 
 diction may not be practicable yet without great difficulties and risks ; 
 but better relations between these may be brought about while the 
 local independence of each Church is maintained. 
 
 Signed, by order of the Committee, 
 
 THOMAS YARD, 
 
 Chairman. 
 
 February 20, 1879. 
 
6 
 
 REPORT ON INTERCOMMUNION WITH 
 
 APPENDIX. 
 
 Greek Church, London Wall, 
 January 7th, 1877. 
 
 The Archimandrite Dr. Hieronymus Myriantheus. 
 My dear Mr. Campion, 
 
 It is with great pleasure that I have learned from your 
 letter of last month that progress is being made in the work of 
 reuniting the orthodox Eastern and English Churches. I shall always 
 be ready to give the Committee my aid towards this holy purpose. 
 
 As to the translation of your Liturgy into modern Greek, I venture 
 to remark that our people are accustomed to hear in our churches 
 the Gospels, the Acts of the Apostles, the Liturgy, the Hymns, and 
 the rest of our services in the language of the New Testament ; 
 consequently no translation into modern Greek, whether it be of the 
 holy Scriptures or Liturgies, will be acceptable to our people. 
 
 Thus it is highly necessary to publish a translation of your Liturgy 
 resembling in its style the Liturgies of St. Chrysostom and St. Basil. 
 
 Accept, dear Mr. Campion, the assurance of my great esteem, 
 
 Archimandrite H. MYRIANTHEUS. 
 
THE EASTERN ORTHODOX CHURCHEH. 
 
 7 
 
 RESOLUTIONS TO BE MOVED WHEN THIS REPORT 
 COMES ON FOR DISCUSSION. 
 
 1. That the Resolutions appended to this Report be now con- 
 sidered. 
 
 2. That the Prolocutor be requested to take this Report to the Upper 
 House. 
 
 3. That their Lordships of the Upper House be respectfully asked to 
 call the attention of the Foreign Translation Committee of the 
 Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge to the remarks of the 
 Bishop of Lincoln, noticed on page 4 of this Report ; and also to the 
 letter of the Greek Archimandrite in the Appendix on the subject of 
 translations of Holy Scripture and of our Liturgy into Greek.