^^^8^ y k '^m ■^ N; \\l^] I A CHARGE OF l/ie ii|cIuleHi[0ii; of m'^ti, DELIVERED TO THE AND CHURCHWARDENS AT HIS VISITATION IN JUNE, 1874; TO WHICH 13 APPENBED A Plea ron Toleration et Law in certain Ritual Matters with Reference to " The Public Worship Regulation Bill." By the bishop OF LINCOLN. BorcHester : H. SPICER, COUNTY PRINTER. 1874 -t^: A copy of this Charge is with rjreat respect 2:>resented to each of the Clergy and of the Church- wardens of the Archdeaconry of Dorset hy their faitlifnl friendj and brother the Archdeacon, with his specicd request that they will give very careful con side rat io?i to the weighty ivords of the Jjlshop of Lincoln, which are given in the Aj)peiulix, and on 7vhich the Archdeacon^ s oum remarhs up)on the Ritual matters in qiiestion are for the most 2^art founded. Poiverstoch, Jidy 3rd, 1874. THE ARCHDEACON'S CHARGE. My Reverend Bretbren and my Brethren of the Laity, — I propose to speak to you chiefly with reference to subjects which have lately come before us in our Diocesan Synod or in Convocation, The fact that these matters have been under consideration in those assem- blies is an evidence that they are of present interest, and it arises out of our due relation to those higher Synods of the Church that in these subordinate assem- blies we should record the decisions which have there been given, and treat of those things which have there been set forth for the consideration of the Church. In this way we may, on the one baud, in our own localities, make known and promote the adoption of measures which have been, as it were, sent down to us ; and, on the other, we may have our part in securing a just settlement of things that are not yet determined. I will therefore make a few remarks upon some of these subjects, in the hope of leading you to give them further consideration individually, and in ruri-decanal chapters and meetings — and this with a view to having the con- clusions so arrived at sent up either in petitions presented or words spoken by those who represent you in the Diocesan Synod or in Convocation. For neither the one assembly nor the other is competent to give a sound and final decision upon questions on which the mind of the faithful members of the Church has not been, more or less, previously ascertained and declared. And, first, I would say a few words in reference to the PUBLIC WORSHIP REGULATION BILL. The subject with which it deals has been placed before the Convocations both of Canterbury and York, but, in my judgment, in the wrong form, at the wrong time, and with too little opportunity for it to receive mature consideration. The mind of the Church had not been ascertained when the Bill was introduced, Churchmeo generally were taken by surprise. The powers of the State were invoked for a settlement of religious ques- tions which had not first been weighed and determined upon by the Spiritualty of the realm. All must, I think, be agreed that the constitution and modes of procedure of our Ecclesiastical Courts require amend- ment ; for, only to take one point, it is intolerable that the redress of a grievance should only be attainable, as is now continually the case, at the cost of thousands of pounds ; and no one can deny that a remedy is urgently needed for evils and abuses prevailing in some of our churches in the ritual of Divine service, whether by excess or defect. But I think it is right for those who hold the opinion to express it — and it has been very widely expressed — that before a new enactment is made by the State to enforce the law of the Church we ought to have some determination by the Church of what, upon some important matters, that law is which is to be enforced. I think it is not untruly said that " it is beginning at the wrong end to simplify ecclesias- tical proceedings till the vws or hx which has to be administered is rather more clearly doflue'l. The process of court-makiug might otherwise be represented as one for forcing rather than working out a ceremonial system." The pleadings of that learned, holy, and truly Anglo-Catholic Bishop of Lincoln have carried conviction to my own mind of the soundness of bis "Plea for Toleration by Law in certain Ritual Matters with reference to the Public Worship llegulatioa Bill." The proposition which the Bishop has there made is of serious importance, and probably he is the one man more than any other competent to make it. This, however, is certain — that concerning some pressing questions of Eitual it has to be determined, as a matter of first concern and requiring a settlemeutnot long deferred, whether with just regai'd to truth the claim of charity can be allowed. The eastward position of the celebrant at the prayer of consecration in the Holy Communion is perhaps the principal point in question. It is for a concession of liberty in respect of this position that a very earnest appeal is made by many zealous and loyal clergy and by many who do not take that position themselves. It is my own conviction that the rubric, rightly interpreted, orders the clergy to " break the bread before the people" — in such a way " before the people" that the appointed sign of breaking the bread may be so made as to be within sight of the people — and consequently that the eastward position of the celebrant is not the position which the Church of England intended her clergy to 'S ,UIUC take. Aud this, iu the opiuion of the Bishop of Lincoln, may probably be the decision of the final court ; and perhaps it may not be out of place to mention that Bishop Hamilton took this interpretation of the rubric as the guide for his own practice. Moreover, a very large number of the clergy — and I am myself one of the number — believe that not only in respect of the rubric, but upon ground apart from the letter of the Prayer Book, the eastward position is not the better way, and it is a position which they would not themselves willingly adopt. But with all this it must still be borne in mind that, not to mention arguments of more or less weight which are adduced in favour of the eastward position, it is evident that the matter is not explicit and simple in law. Some very remarkable words in respect of the legal position of the question have been very lately spoken by a man who will not be accused of disloyalty to the Reformation, aud whose authority as a lawyer is beyond question — the present Lord Chancellor, Lord Cairns. Aud his words concur with those of another man of like high legal authority. He says : — " As to the position of the minister in the Communion service during the time of consecration, that is a subject on which it will not be expected, nor would it be proper, that I should give any expression of opinion as to what the law on the subject may be. But I wish, to call your lordships' attention to the position of the question. I think that there are in the Church of England a great number of persons — a large number of clergymen — who have no sympathy whatever with Ritualists — I use a familiar expression — or Ritualism, who have no sympathy with those extravagances and those departures from the law that have been referred to in this House, and who yet feel themselves much distressed aud dis- quieted by the present law on the subject of the position of the minister during the time of consecration. Upon that subject there have been two decision?, more or less final, by the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council. I do not desire to say one word as to the law on the question, but every one knows how extremely difficult it is for any person — for any layman, perhaps for any lawyer — to be satisfied that those two decisions are reconcileable with each other. In one of those cases no defence was made, aud only one side was heard. Those decisions, I thinJ:, cannot he re{/cinkd as Jincd"^— very weighty words. And he goes on to give a sign of approval to the suggestion of the Bishop of Peterborough, a suggestion founded upon the plea for toleration of the Bishop of Lincoln — that this question should be placed upon neutral ground. But we must take note of the vital (listiuction there is between the proposal of the Bishop (if Peterborough which was adopted by the Lord Chancellor and now happily withdrawn, and that of the Bishop of Lincoln. In the former ca.se, to use the Lord Chancellor's description of the plan, he is reported to say "I see in the proposal of the llight Keverend Prelate much that in a rough way would arrive at a conclusion which for practical purposes is not unlike conclusions which might be arrived at by rubrical alterations." Now this rough way of arriving at conclusions for practical purposes in Parliament upon serious questioUJi of religion may commend itself to some minds, but it is not the thing recommended by the Bishop of Lincoln. In his plea for toleration — after deprecating its being left to individual clergymen to choose by an eclectic process what rites and ceremouit-s they please from ancient, mediicval, or modern Churches, and to im- port them into their own Churches and to impose them on their own congregations — the Bishop says " The Church of England, exercising that authority which belongs to all National Churches, ought to define and declare publicly by her synodical judgments what things in her services are to be regarded as obligatory and what may be considered as indifl'erent. And she ought, as an Established Church, to seek for legal sanction from the Crown and from Parliament for these her authoritative definitions and declarations. These were the principles on which our Book of Common Prayer was framed and revised." And in his place in the House of Lords, among much else to the same ellect, the Bishop is reported to have said " In order that legislation might be effective, that it might produce harmony and not discord, it was absolutely necessary that it should carry with it the sympathy of the clergy of the Church of England. The clergy of the Church of England exercised an influence — not only spiritual and religious, but moral and political — over the great body of the English community. It would be an evil day for the Legislature and for the Government, but Btill more for the Church itself, it the clergy were to be alienated in feeling from the civil authorities in the State. Leaving out of view the men of extreme opinions, he was in a position to state that the clergy were alarmed, not by this Bill alone, but also by the manner in which it was carried forward. It seemed to him that the obvious means of conciliating the clergy was to consult the Synods in which they were represented." And he added " If that body were coueulted in a proper way 1 am persuaded that hardly a week would elapse before a peaceful solution of the difficulty had been arrived at." This course of procedure, whatever persons of high authority in the State may say to the contrary, I conceive to be the only legitimate one — the only one to which any religious body can, with justice to itself, submit. If toleration by law can be had in this orderly way it is, in my judgment, a thing to be much desired, and it is a course, as we have been reminded, which has been taken by the Protestant Episcopal Church of America, a Church in full communion with ourselves. The question cannot much longer be left in uncer- tainty and it remains for those who preside over the Church of England to call upon her to determine whether she can rightly pronounce that the position of the celebrant at the Prayer of Consecration in the Holy Communion is a thing in itself indifferent or not. This I feel — that some part of the special significance of the one position and the other would be removed if by the authority of the law both positions were made equally lawful. I must here mention that I have in my pos- session a letter of that great Bishop, whose loss the whole Church of England so deeply feels — Bishop Wilberf orce — which touches ver}- closely upon this point. I had written to him about a friend of mine who had applied to him for the appointment to an important curacy, and had said in the letter, in which I strongly commended this clergyman to the Bishop in all other respects, that I was not certain whether he might not make it a point of conscience to take the eastward position at the Holy Communion, and that I felt it right to mention this. And the reply that came from the Bishop to my friend contained these words — " The only point in the Archdeacon's letter which suggests any difficulty is what appears to me a very immaterial question — namely, as to where you stand at the Prayer of Consecration. As to that, it is absolutely necessary that the curate conforms to the custom of the Church. Which way that is I am not absolutely certain." I have said enough to express my own desire that the Church should in her convocations and in her other assemblies anxiously consider whether this liberty can rightly be conceded. And the solution which I should myself hope to see is that which the Bishop of Lincoln proposes — '' Let either position of the celebrant be declared by authority to be lawful ; in other words, let the position be pronounced by law to be indifferent." And again with him as to that other matter which is in dispute at law, I feel constrained to say — "Let the 8 National Church of England declare by authority that a Eioiple distinctive dress for the celebratiuu of the Holy Eucharist is permissible, but not to be enforced upon auy. This also has already been done iu some dioceoea of America. Iu that country there is a double safe- guard agc'iinst extravagances ; first, the consent, duly ascertained and expressed, of the communicants of thu congregation or parish ; and next, the sanction of the Ordinary. Both these guarantees against innovations and excesses may be obtained iu the Church of England as well as in that of America." With respect to the position of this question at law, the Bishop says, " I am rather disposed to think that the use of such a vestment might hereafter be pronounced to be obligatory." I think Mr. Beresford Hope states the position of this question f.iirly. He says " As to the distinctive dress at the Holy Communion, the question has really been brought within a very narrow compass. A prescription of such dresses applying to all churches is unquestionably found in a rubric of the Prayer Book of 154!), and is, as many contend, re-enacted in the existing Ornaments Rubric. Another prescription of such dresses — (which may either be (1) supiilementary to that rubric, and intended to enforce a minimum of compliance with it, or else (2) falling short of it, and intended to supplant it), only mentioning their use iu cathedrals and collegiate churches — is found in the2ith and 25th Canons of 1(303. The judicial committee, in llibbtrt v. Purchas, rejected the wider prescription of the dresses contained in the rubric, but re-affirmed the narrower one of the canons ; and since that judgment several distinguished prelates and dignataries have adopted such dresses under the conditions which the canons lay down. But the ])rinciple underlying the rubric of 1549 and the canons of 1*303 is confessedly the same — that of doing the highest material honour to Almighty God at the highest act of worship. Thus the question is reduced to a very narrow issue, not of principle, but of detail. "Does the 24th Canon contemplate a maximum or a minimum use of the given ceremonial ? At this point, surely, negotiation may come in." And what is the principle which underlies the whole ordering of our Prayer Book ? It is affirmed in the preface, where it is said '*' It has been the wisdom of the Church of England, ever since the first compiliug of her public liturgy, to keep the mean between the two extremes, of too much stiffness iu refusing, and of too much laxness iu admitting, any variation from it ;" and "it is but reason- able that, upua weighty aud important cousideration:-, 9 according to the various exigencies of times and occasions, such changes and alterations should be made therein as to those that are in places of authority should from time to time seem either necessary or expedient." And upon this the Bishop of Lincoln remarks : — " It may, therefore, be presumed that our reformers and our revisers of the Book of Common Prayer would, as wise, learned, and pious men, carefully contemplating the altered circumstances of the time and the condition of the Church in these days, be the first to relax some of the stringent laws of our ritual, and to pronounce certain things to be indifferent by law, in order that they might promote those high and holy purposes of faith, worship, and morals for which the Prayer Book was framed, and which are paramount to all rites and ceremonies of human institutions." With regard to the Bill itself, it is so altered that its original features can scarcely be recognised, and as I write this it is hard to ascertain what its pre- sent form is — much less to give an opinion as to what it may become before it passes, if indeed it does this year pass into law. Whatever may be its final shape it may, in my opinion, be taken for certain that, after all that has taken place, no proceedings under it will be allowed either in respect of things doubtful in law or of things which may before long be pronounced indifferent. The bishops, it seems, are to have a di-s- cretion in allowing proceedings to be taken ; and it is very unlikely they will encourage litigation. I trust that they will not consent to part with anything which of right belongs to them as rulers in their own dioceses, subject to the higher provincial rule of the Archbishop, and, as a last resort, to the Final Court of Appeal. An ecclesiastical lawyer — a man at the summit of his pro- fession — said to me a few days since "You do not want new courts ; you want to simplify, cheapen, and expedite the course of procedure in the courts which you already have." But I will not weary you with more about this great legal problem. Believing as I do that the mind of the great body of the Church of England is sound and right, I believe also that b}' the care of Him who is ever with us we shall be safely guided through our present difficulties. THE PAN-ANGLICAIf STIfOD. I should like just to say. that in my opinion some of the most grave questions which are now before the Church will rightly be brought under consideration when there is another conference of the Bishops of the Anglican Communion, and that such a conference, 10 which will probably soon be held, will be likely to con- duce beyond anything else to a settlement of things in which all the Churches of one communion areetiually in- terestetl with ourselves. The Bishop of Lichfield lately presented a memorial from the liishops of the Ecclesi- astical Province of Canada and from the West Indian Lishops to the Archbishop of Canterbury (and this memorial is supported by the wishes of the United ►States' and Australian Churches), praying for this conference ; and the Archbishop has appointed a joint committee of both Houses of Convocation to report to him upon (l)hi8 own relation to the various branches of the Anglican communion scattered throughout the worhl and upon (2) the petition of the bishops. And among other words ui)on this subject, speaking with that breadth of view and largeness of heart which so characterise him, Lishop Selwyn said: — "Even though there is no proba- bility of the unity of Christendom being restored, is it for us to sit down in despair, or, rather, ought we not to thank God that He has already spread the Anglican communion throughout so large a portion of the earth, and that there is power now by united action and the blessing of the Holy Spirit of seeking for that spiritual control which, in the early ages, pronounced authoritatively on all disputed ques- tions ''. Having nearly 160 Bishops who preside over the Anglican Communion, I am persuaded that a volun- tary tribunal of appeal, established by their authority under the presidency of the Archbishop of Canterbury, would be accepted as a court of final appeal on questions of doctrine now threatening the disruption of various branches of the Church. It would be the central magnet by which all the planetary bodies that revolve round the Church of England would be kept in subjection. I should like to speak as to the probable efiect of the existence of such a body. I cannot hope that any very great result will come from the rigid enforcement of laws laid down in language, often ambiguous, 200 or 300 years ago. I cannot believe that it was ever intended that the laws then made should never admit of any contempora- neous exposition by the voice of the Church, but should be submitted to the law courts to be judged by the verbal and literal construction of legal documents. What I do gatlier from the opinions of many of the most intelligent of the clergy is that if the authoritative voice of the Church itself could be heard there is scarcely one clergyman in a thousand who would not respect it. There are some who deny the authority of the Judicial Committee of the Privy Couucil, and some who doubt il whether its doctrines are good ; and whilst that state of doubt remains clergj'tnen are tempted to wander into the dark regions of so-called Catholicity to seek for reasons to justify disobedience to the law ; and raise, upon grounds wholly insufficient, the question whether they ought not to obey God rather than man. I lament the existence of this state of mind, but when doubts of that kind exist it is our duty to seek the remedy ; and instead of attempting to enforce the law I think much more would be done by establishing such a tribunal as that which I have pointed out, which should take into consideration statements of doctrine, and external acts symbolical of doctrine, and decide whether such words and acts are or are not permissible to a priest of the Church of England in any branch of the Anglican Communion. If such a tribunal were established I could mention some'.who would give their willing sub- mission to the authoritative voice of the Church declared in the manner which I have endeavoured to describe, especial!}' if that voice came from the united Anglican Communion, under the presidency of the Archbishop of Canterbury." ^•EW CODE OF CA^'o^'s. It come* in here to mention that a committee of Con- vocation was appointed by the President in 1S6G "to examine the constitutions and canons ecclesiastical with a view to their amendment and adaptation to the present necessities of the Church." Afterwards enlarged powers were given to the committee, and it was instructed to prepare and submit to the House a body of new canons, and they have co-operated in their deliberations and in their work with a Committee of the Convocation of York. We need not dwell un the necessity of a code of canons suitable to these times, for such necessity is manifest to any one who reads carefully the canons to which we owe allegiance now. The joint committee has just lately brought to a final completion a work which, as they say, has cost many of them days and even years of anxiety and labour. They have issued a draft of a new code of canons, and in presenting it to the House they say — "It will be for the Convocations of the two Provinces to enlarge and amend in substance and in form the canons suggested in this attempt ; but the committee are not Avithout hope that, if the House will apply to the Crown for license to enact a new body of canons, the draft which follows this report may at least form a guide to the deliberations of this House, and perhaps a foundation on which to build a 12 useful structure of Church practice. The committee would only further suggest that the accompnuyiug draft of a new code of canons .should be printed, and, if p().sjiiljlf, obtain some extended circulation among the clcruy and others of both Provinces, in order that the opinion and judgment of the Church at large should be in some degree obtained before a discussiou of the separate canons takes place in the House of Convocation. The committee, in conclusion, desire to lay this their report before the House, with an earnest prayer that the anxious and laborious work of several years may be some help to thi.s Synod in promoting the order and efficiency of Christ's Kingdom in England." The Dean of Wiuche.ater is the chairman of this committee, and iu a letter which I lately received from him he says — "Our present objectis togetthisdraft.'^ofar into circulation that we may obUiiu thegeneral opinion of Churchmen before the subject is taken up iu Convocation, and it would do the committee real service if by any means you can make this known." It will be seen that the matter is of great importance, and that it is one which could, to great advantage, be brought before our ruri-decanal chapters — and it would, I thiuk, be a good thing to have a number of copies of this draft printed iu a cheap form for circulation among the clergy and others in the arch- deaconry, in order to make known what is proposed, and to elicit the mind of the Church upon the proposals. The last canon in the draft entitled "Of obedience to Canons p]cclesiastical " sets forth the relation iu which Churchmen stand to them. " Cduonp, constitutions, and ordinance.^, being rules set forth in this Church by those who have authority thereto, for the direction and good government of the Church, and for the framing of the lives and conduct both of the clergy and of the lay members thereof iu accordance with right discipline and the law of Christ, are not only to be yielded unto at such times as they are put iu force by the spiritual courts, but also ought to be obeyed and kept dutifully and conscientiously by every member of this Church, following with a free will and glad mind the godly rules and order out of the same." It will be seen that this settlement of a new code of canons, thus claiming our obedience, must be considered iu connection with the review of the rubrics and of the law which is to regulate our public worship. ECCLESIASTICAL DILAPIDATIONS. To the subject of Ecclesiastical Dilapidations— a subject very different indeed in kind from those of 13 which we have been speaking — I have, in my circular letter, called your special attention, because it is one in which very many of us have a direct practical interest, because I have had some letters from the clergy on the subject, and also because the Acts by which arrange- ments are now made in this matter are not held to contain a final settlement of the question. There is a report of a Committee of Convocation on the subject which has not yet been taken into consideration, and there have been several petitions to Convocation con- taining gravamina in the matter, and these have been referred to the committee which at the commencement of this present Convocation was re-appointed by the Archbishop. The committee have '' to consider and report whether any, and if any, what alterations might advantageously be made in the laws relating to dilapida- tions of ecclesiastical buildings." I will shortly place before you some of the points upon which suggestions for alteration have been made, not by any means think- ing them all equally good, but with the thought that it might be well perhaps if in our ruri-decanal chapters we, were to consider these and any other particulars of the question. We must be all agreed that the old system was not good for the property of the Church, and not good for the clergy and their families. The intention of the Act of 1S71 was better to ensure ecclesiastical buildings from decay, to improve the method of the assessment of dilapidations, and in other ways to give relief. And no doubt much good in respect of the first object has been efiected. Already the property of the Church has been greatly benefited by the requirement that in every case of sequestration, and in every case of a benefice becoming vacant; either by resignation, ex- change, or death, the buildings must, as soon as circum- stances admit, be put into thorough repair. In the case of a vacant benefice the claim for dilapidations stands on the same footing as other debts, but if the estate of the late incumbent is insufficient to meet the claim, facilities are given to the new incumbent, who is called upon to repair the dilapidations, to borrow money from Queen Anne's Bounty. Many too of the uncertainties and abuses of the old system have been removed. These we will not discuss, but turn to some things which have been suggested as amendments of the present law. And (1 ) the Com- mittee of Convocation recommend that power should be given to the Governors of Queen Anne's Bounty to frame rules and regulations for the guidance of surveyors and other persons who have to carry the pro. 14 visions or the Act into operation. This is one thing for which I think we ought to presa. At present there is much left to the judgment of the several surveyors. There have, for instance, been conflicting opinions upon the most important question of what they term * insensi- ble waste' — that is, gradual deterioration of property by fair wear and tear — as to what it is and how it should be dealt with. Ls it not desirable that the law should lay down some definite principles in this particular for the guidance of the surveyors and for the Bishop who by the Act has to give the final decision when the surveyor's report is disputed ? Then (2) there is the question of insurance. By the Act every incumbent is to insure against fire in the joint names of himself and the governors (to at least three-fifths of their value) all the buildings which he is liable to repair, and he is to exhibit the receipt for the premium of such insurance every year at the visitation of the Bishop or Archdeacon, and the following questiois are to be added to those annually sent to incumbents under the provisions of the Act of the Session of the first and second years of Her Majesty, chapter one hundred and six, that is to say : — " In what office, and for what amount, are the buildings of your benefice insured against fire ? And what was the amount and date of the last annual payment for such insurance ?" Apart from the claim for obedience to its provisions made by the Act there is the penalty that in case of loss by fire, and an insufficiency of insurance to meet the loss, the surveyor has to give the Bishop a certificate stating the extent of the deficiency, and the incumbent has within three months to pay the deficiency, on the pain of having his living sequestered. We shall, I think, be agreed that the holders of Church property in trust should be under an obligation to ensure that property against fire, and it is suggested by the Convo- cation Committee that the governors of Queen Anne's Bounty be empowered to effect these insurances, and that all new incumbents be obliged to ensure with the said governors. They put this suggestion in the following form :— ** The premiums might be paid by the clergy as the tenths now are, and be recoverable by the governors in the same way. The facilities which the office of the Bounty Board affords for this proposed work in connec- tion with that which it now performs, no less than the kiud of property insured, justify the committee in expecting that these insurances might be effected at a less percentage, and also that there would result a profit- income applicable to increase the fund for the augmen- tation of livings, or to pay the expenses of the surveyors 15 and registrars under * The Ecclesiastical Dilapidations Act, 1871,' or for other Church purposes. The provision here recommended would be especially beneficial to the clergy by diminishing both the trouble and expense occasioned by the 55th section of the Act, for, as the governors would know the fact of the insurance and could secure the payment of the premium, a proviso might be added to the 55th section to the eflfect that the receipt for the premium of insurance be not exhibited at the visitation when the insurance has been effected at the office of the Bounty Board. The governors might also be empowered to accept the insurance against damage by fire of the whole fabric of the church on the applications of the churchwardens or others." I think that if such a mode of insurance is to be made compul- sory, or, indeed, if it only be with a view to making it attractive, the terms of the insurance should not be higher than may be necessary to give proper security to the office ; there ought not to be any considerable profit. Again, it is suggested (3) "That the provisions of the Act iu the case of complaints made by the patron, archdeacon, or rural dean be rendered applicable to those lay rectors, impropriators, or others, on whom rests the obligation of repairing the chancel or other portion of the church." For my own part I cannot see why such persons and property were not at the first included within the opera- tions of the Act. We ought, I think, to petition that they may be. There is also (i) the serious question of the expense incurred in borrowing money from the Bounty Fund. If even a sum of only £100 is borrowed the cost of the mortgage for that amount is fixed by the Gilbert Acts at £10 15s., in addition to some payments to the officials of the diocese. This is, I am sure, a real grievance and an obstruction to the beneficial action of the governors. It seems, too, (5) that when a loan is required partly for repair (as under the new Act it may be) and partly for rebuilding, adding, or purchasing, it is believed there must be separate mortgage deeds for each amount borrowed. Surely one deed may be made sufficient. And (6) the machinery of negotiation with the Bounty Board is sadly cumbrous and expensive. Then (7) with regard to livings under sequestration. It is hap- pily provided that the claim for dilapidations shall be a charge upon the net profits received by the sequestrator, second only to the claim for the stipends of the curates appointed to perform the duties. But there is this difficulty — that often a considerable time elapses before an amount sufficient to cover the estimated expense of the repairs is forthcoming from the benefice, and the 16 work has to be done in part as the money from time to time comes iti ; estituates made at the first cannot be depended upon after some time has elapsed ; great inconvenience ia caused through the delay to the clergy- man in residence ; the property sufifers injury, and when there are tenants on tbe estate they suffer too, and the work itself being done piecemeal is done at greater cost. The amendment proposed is that the governors of the Bounty Office should be empowered to make a loan of the amount required to be repaid as the money comes in from the benefice by the sequestrator. In this way the works could be at once completed, and, as it seems, without placing any of the parties concerned at a disadvantage. Some amend- ment, too, (S) should be made in 45th section, where the surveyor is authorised himself to employ builders and contractors to execute the work which he will himself have to inspect. It is suggested that the treasurer of the Bounty Office, or that the seques- trator, should be the contracting party. It is a difficult point to determine, but certainly the surveyor should not be also the master builder. One principal in- tention of the Act, was (9) to give facilities to incumbents to put their houses in repair, and to receive certificates from the surveyor which should ensure them against ordinary dilapidation charges for five years. But the provisions to this end have been very little made use of in our diocese. And why is this ? Probably sometimes from indifference ; sometimes because the clergy have been unable to afford any considerable present outlay ; sometimes because those " who have their houses in fair condition and nicely furnished will not incur the trouble and turmoil of an inspection and subsequent repair." Very often too for another reason. Many a man desires to remove the burden of liability from his family, and yet he does not set in motion a machinery which he has no power subsequently to regulate, to check, or in any way to interfere with, and which may compel expenses of a magnitude such as when he entered on his benefice he had no reason to think he could have been made liable to. There are not a few who would be ready to put the buildings on their benefices in repair, and thus procure the five years' certificate, if they had permission to borrow the money for that purpose, and with the consent of the bishop and patron this may, by the Act, be done. But then arises the question whether it is just that an incumbent who has neglected the repairs for which he is liable should be allowed to burden the benefice by a mortgage, and so relieve his personal 17 estate in the case of his own death or resignation. The rule in this particular is not the same in all dioceses. It lias been suggested (10) that the surveyor's charges have deterred some men from availing themselves of this pro- vision of the Act. It may be so ; but I have no ground myself for believing this to have been the case. The work in our archdeaconry has been done well, and has on the whole given as much satisfaction as could be expected in the working out of what must often be considered au unpleasant business. It is essential to have a thoroughly competent surveyor, and such a person must be suitably as well as reasonably paid. If there should be any need to re-adjust the scale of payment or in any way to amend the terms of the engagement an opportunity will arise during the present autumn, when the period for which the present diocesan surveyors were appointed will have expired and the archdeacons and rural deans will be called upon to re- consider the present arrangements. With reference to an amendment of the Act every care should be taken to make its provisions for enabling incumbents to obtain a five years' certificate as simple as they can be made. A suggestion has been made (11) that it should be the duty of the surveyors when they make their first inspections to take a terrier or list of all the lands, buildings, &c., of a benefice — this terrier to be kept at the bishop's registry for use in future surveys, and a copy of it to be kept in the parish chest. Whether the surveyor should be the person to do this or whether it should be done by the minister, churchwardens, and other honest men of the parish as is ordered by. the 87th Canon, such a terrier ought to be provided for every parish. Our surveyor tells me of a parish in this archdeaconry afi'ording an instance of the necessity of looking after the property — the money value of the property of the benefice being not worth so much by £1,000 as it was 40 years ago, simply because the incumbents neglected during that period to hold a court. A suggestion has been made (12) by Mr. Crickmay, with a view to dealing with the difficult subject of fair wear and tear and progessive decay — that the surveyor should, with the other matters upon which he has to report under section 15 of the Act, report also "what sum of money shall be paid to the governors for and towards a Contingent or rebuilding fund for such inherent decay, as it would not be expedient or possible to at once repair," and he also suggests (13) that some means of creating a Dilapidation Insurance Fund might be devised. He sug- gests also (14) that an addition should be made to the 58th section of the Act in regard to buildings standing on lands belonging to a benefice and comprised in any lease. 18 The last words of the section now stand : " It shall be lawful for the surveyor to inspect the buildings comprised in any such lease ;" he suggests that "a clause should be introduced requiring the surveyor to report on the state of such buildings, and the incumbents to serve notice to the lessees to perform thecovenantof their lease ; the final certificate should not be given until theae repairs had been executed by the lessee." He suggests also (lo) an amend- ment in the 71st clause in order to allow the removal under proper authority not only of any building belonging to, or forming part of, any house of residence, but also of any buildings belonging to the benefice. And (16) one other sug- gestion of his I will mention, thatin cases of vacant benefices treated under the Act, provision should be made for re- ferring the question of fixtures to the diocesan surveyor, and in the event of his finding that they belong to the late incumbent, that he should value the same, and that the new incumbents should be empowered to borrow the amount of such valuation from Queen Anne's Bounty and purchase the fixtures, and thenceforth those fixtures, and all future fixtures, should belong to the benefice ; appeal from the diocesan surveyor's award to be provided as in the case of repairs. There are, how- ever, many difficulties connected with such a proposal. This subject of ecclesiastical dilapidation, and the position of the clergy with respect to recent legislation, has been very carefully treated of in a paper read before the lluri-decanal Chapter of Weulock, in the Diocese of Hereford, by the liev. William Elliot, vicar of Cardiug- ton, and published by request. It is to be had at Messrs. Rivington's for sixpence. In this paper it is maintained that practically under the Act the responsi- bility of the clergy for dilapidation is now entirely un- limited and undefined, and, as being neither that of landlord or tenant, anomalous — that the court which has to assess for their damages consists of a single person, who, moreover, is not required to give any detailed ac- count of the estimated expenditure, and that the surveyor is really the final arbiter. It is maintained that even before the surveyor there is no locus standi to plead mitigation of damages, and that from his award there is no satisfactory source of appeal, and scarcely any discretionary power in the hands of the Bishop. I think that at any rate in some of the particulars to which I have referred there are things which need consideration and amendment. Mr. KUiot is in favour of the course which wo have adopted in this diocese — of having two surveyors rather thaa only one ; and of having men of the locality 19 rather than men resident in London or at a distance. To show of what practical importance this matter is, let me state that Mr. Crickmay has been good enough to make me a return of the number of benefices which have been surveyed in this archdeaconry since the Act came into operation. There are some 250 benefices in this county, and of these in the years 1S72 and 1873, and counting seven cases up to April in 1874, 60 surveys have been made. There have been vacant (by exchange 4, by resignation 14, by death 25) in all 43 ; under sequestration 6 ; with a view to a five years' certificate 11 ; this number together being very little short of the fourth part of the whole number of benefides in the archdeaconry. And five, in addition to these GO, were not visited either because there were no buildings or by direction of the Bishop. In 21 cases the repairs are completed. The amount of estimated expenditure upon the 60 benefices is about £11,000, and on the average about £183 on each, but, of course, there is the greatest variation in these amounts. A most useful little book upon this question is entitled " A Handy Book on the Ecclesiastical Dilapidations Act, 1871, with the Amendment Act, 1872," by Edward G. Brutou, F.R.I. B.A., Diocesan Surveyor, Oxon. Second Edition, with Analytical Index and printed forms. Rivington. And now I would make some remarks in reference to THE DIOCESAN SYNOD, and to some things which have been considered by it. There have been four meetings of the Synod — one in the year 1871, and one in each successive year. We have had a full opportunity of considering its constitution and its procedure ; and the result is that very slight variations from its original form have been found desirable. The only change of any importance is referred to in the following resolution : — " That previous to the election of another Diocesan Synod, the Bishop be requested to direct that the relative number of lay representatives to be elected by the several parishes of the diocese be as follows : — For populations under 200, one ; 200 and under 1,000, two ; 1,000 and under 2,000, three ; 2,000 and upwards, four." As the lay members of the Synod are elected by the parochial representatives a more just proportion of influence in the election will thus be given to places containing a larger population. On this basis the election of the new Synod will take place in October. With reference to that election, I venture to express the hope that the clergy and church- wardens will not ^ail to see that representatives for their 20 parishes are chosen. It is the Bishop's earnest desire to have the advice of the Church within his diocese fully and freely given — and it is only loyalty on our part to give a hearty acceptance to his invitation. It appears that on the last occasion some 45 parishes of the diocese made no return of lay representatives. In not a few cases this omission was made, though it was not a sufli- cient cause, because the parishes in question were very small ; probably in some few instances out of objection to the Synod itself, and in some for no assignable reason. It should, however, be understood that every parish or district which appoints either oneor two church- wardens is called upon by the Bishop to elect one or more lay representatives — to be members of the lluri-decanal Synod and to take part in the election of the members of the Diocesan Synod. If such a case should occur — that both the clergy and churchwardens neglect, and upon application made to them decline to call a meeting for the election to take place, and if there should bo laymen in that parish who desire to be represented, and have no means of securing that rei)reseutation in a more orderly manner — the Bishop has expressed the hope that the laymen would meet aud make an election as they best could. Among other words on this subject the Bishop said *"' There were some parishes which were under the immediate and entire influence of laymen, who had from the first disapproved of such a thing a.s this and had practically forbidden it, and that accounted for a certain number of parishes that had not sent representatives. There were also certain other parishes where the clergyman had taken a distinct tone of opposition and had thrown himself more or less into opposition to that which they had doue, and where of course, as was not unnatural, lay representatives had not been elected. He should like to say, with respect to that, that of course they always sent to the clergyman and the churchwardens to direct that they should take measures for the election of lay representatives, but he did not imagine it depended on either clergyman or churchwardens to prevent any such election." And as a matter of justice to the lay members of the Church I think it is necessary to meet a few such extreme cases by this abnormal provision. One other matter touching the constitution of the Synod was discussed upou a motion being made "That to secure a more complete representation of the whole clergy of the diocese at future general elections of Synodsmen one of the clerical representativeselected by each ruraldeanry shall be elected from the uon-beueficed clergy of the diogese." Jn regard 21 to this it was felt on the one hand that the freest access to the Synod should be given to the clergy who are working with us as curates, and on the other that the freest liberty iu selecting their representatives should be maintained for the whole body of the clergy — and that by the existing regulations this freedom was iu both respects secured. One other question of reform was raised, and that related not to the constitution of the Synod but to its procedure. It is a question, too, of considerable importance. A motion was made " That on all occasions of the votes on a division being called for the votes be taken by orders" — thrvt it should be the invariable rule for the clergy and laity to vote in separate bodies. This, iu direct contradiction to the standing order of the Synod, that ordinarily '"' all the members shall vote together." This proposal so to change the procedure of the Synod \Yas declared to be lost by an immense majority of the members present. And the Bishop said that he looked upon it as a first principle that they should blend together as one body unless a case of necessity for otherwise acting arose. The present stand- ing order provides " That before a division 15 clerical or 15 lay members may require that the vote be taken by orders." I am inclined to think that liberty for the exercise of this claim for a vote by orders should be given after a division in cases where a motion has been made and carried by a majority. The object of a vote by orders in that case being to ascertain whether the decision is acceptable to both clergy and laity — whether practically through the consent of both orders a resolution which has been passed could be put into ure — for this could not profitably be done if either order dissented from the conclusion. Other cases of necessity for a vote by orders would now and then pro- bably arise ; but, without here entering into the theory of the matter, the practical result of the whole body, as a rule, voting together has been so good that it would surely be very unwise to change the standing order iu that respect. THE EEFOEM OF CO>'VOCATION came before us in the Synod, and the subject is making at last considerable progress both iu Convo- cation itself and the Church outside it. As a sign of the Archbishop's intention to move in the matter a committee is again appointed to report upon the election of proctors, and the subject is now quite certain not to be dropped. In our own diocese the mode of election being indirect and the number of representatives 22 small, is most unsatisfactory. If the plan proposed in Convocatiou is carried out the arcbdeacouries of tlie diocese will elect their own proctors — Sariim and Wiltfi one each and Dorset two ; and the electors will be tliu clergy in priesta* orders, beneficed and licensed, in eacli archdeaconry. Happily our venerable Dean at the latn election broke through the longstanding custom c»f retaining the appointment of the Cathedral Proctor in the hands of the canons residentiary, .'ind summoned the great Chapter to vote for a representative. iNo definilu precedent for this mode of election could be found in the Cathedral records ; but the Dean was satisfied, from a consideration of the ori^dn and histor\' of the Cathedral, that such must have been the couise of procedure iu like matters in early days and that such for certain ought to be the course now. So many questions of grave importance are continuall}' coming before Convo- cation that it becomes more and more of iuiportanco that it should be well constituted ; find I think that the clergy should not cease to petition fur its reform. TATRONAGE. Another subject which came before us iu Synod, and in which at last there seems to be a reasonable hope of reform, is that of Patronage. We have the weighty utter- ances of the Bishop of Lincoln upon it, and the subject has been entrusted for consideration to a committee of the House of Lords upon the motion of the Bishop of Peter- bcjrough, who, among other words in that great speeeh, was able to say that he made the motion with the unauimous concurrence of his right rev. biethreu. AVe may surely hope that .some of the most grave abuses in the matter will be removed. There is little desire among us to imi- tate the Church of Scotland and place all appointments to livings iu the hands of the congregations. We are not iu favour of popular elections. We certainly do not wish to see patronage separated from the tenure of pro- perty with which it is associated. Probably no system can be likely to work better than one like our own where patronage is widely distributed among several classes of patrons — and those patrons in very many cases having a special local interest — and it would be very difficult to say as a matter of fact that better njen are chosen by one class of patrons than another. And it can be seen that the mind of the Church is now set in the right direction, and that, as a rule, great care is taken in the appointments. But there are sad ex- ceptions, and the public advertisemei^ts still tell of much 23 traffic iu sacred things. Some things seem to staud in urgent need of revisiun — the sale of next presentations, — the sale of advowsous without limitation uf the conditions of sale (c.(j., iu respect of the power to preseut immediately upon purchase and without restrictions to resell), — the anomalous position of donatives, which are made the medium of illicit transactions by reason of the exceptional circumstances under which they can be entered upon without presentation to the Bishop, and resigned without his having any power to stay the resignation — bonds of resignation and their force to deprive the Bishop of his power for reasonable cause to disallow resignation — the lack of. safeguards against improper selection by patrons (as iu the appointment of men too old, too young, or otherwise manifestly in- competent) — the discretion of the Bishop in respect of institution and the course of procedure by which the Bishop can exercise his right of objection to institute — the legal absurdities in the law of simony, and the facilities for its evasion and the form in which a presentee makes his declaration that he has not done anything which he knows to be simoniacal — the claim of parishioners to have some right of being heard in objection to an appointment — the mode under which exchanges are effected — these and no doubt other things in connection with our system uf patronage need revision — and why may they not have that revision ? Their amend- ment would not touch the liberty of patrons in anything which rightly belongs to their trust — and it would not touch the great body of patrons who honestly exercise their trust, but it would check the course of that secret and illegitimate traffic which has so long with justice been our reproach. Happily, we have in our present Home Ministei-, Mr. Cross, a Churchman who takes the deepest personal interest in this matter, as we know by the fact that he himself, not long since, introduced into the House of Commons a Bill to abolish the sale of next presentations, and there are many other lay members of both Houses of Parliament equally anxious to promote the removal of abuses to which we have been referring. There was also a subject before us in Synod which had a close connection with our meeting to day. ADMISSION OF CHURCHAVARDENS TO OFFICE. A Bill " to provide facilities for the admission of church* wardens to office" was introduced into Parliament by Mr. Monk. The point of it consisted in permission being given to churchwardens to make their declaration before their 24 own clergyman or the rural dean instead of making it before the Ordinary at the visitation. There are other ob- jections to such a course being adopted, but that which makes it most objectionable is that it would weaken the claim which now rests upou the officers of the parish church to attend the visitatiou. There is now once every year.au occasion upon which an opportunity is given to persons in authority of trying to set right in a parish things which may be wrong. Grievances can be stated, and they are often removed upon this statement being made. The laity of the Church have their oppor- tunity of appeal — the property of the Church is reported upou— presentments in respect of the performance of the duties of the clergy and of the character of the clergy are made — men in and under authority meet together for their common advantage. There may be much that might be better in the ordering of our visi- tations, and they are a fair subject fame effect as the resolution which was moved by Lord Nelson and carried, I think, unanimously in our Synod, and embodied iu a petition to the House of Commons, which was presented by 'Mr. Cross, " That the Synod would be sorry to see the declaration now made by a churchwarden iu the Court of the Bishop or Archdeacon made as this Bill would allow, without some very special reason, before the incumbent or llural Dean." Lord Nelson said that he " regarded the attendance of churchwardens at the visitation courts as a matter of importance connected with the proper represention of the laity ; and if they carelessly altered it merely for the purpose of meeting the convenience of a few church- wardens — although the system might be improved upon iu another way, by making the work of the church- wardens more real — he believed they should go backwards and lose that hold which the Coustitutiou at present gave the laity iu the affairs of the Church." Several other subjects were before us iu Synod ; some of the most important I must altogether pass by, and on one or two others just say a word. A resolution was unanimously adopted that there ought to be annual collectiuus in all parishes for the 25 DIOCESAN CHURCH SOCIETIES ; and, surely, there ought to be such a collectiou every- where, and I wish some special day were appointed for the purpose. The subject of PAROCHIAL FEES had considerable discussion, and the report of the com- mittee is in general circulation. It deals with things material and external, but at the same time with things which must be dealt with in daily life, and which ought to have a settlement, upon which, as far as may be, those who pay the fees and those who receive them may be agreed. The table of fees which the committee are instructed to draw up will be issued under the authority of the Bishop, and I am persuaded that it will be found in many places very useful. With regard to LAY AGENCY the principal points referred to were — First, SUNDAY SCHOOL UNIONS — which are found in some instances where they have been at work in the diocese to have been helpful, and the Board of Education is called upon to consider whether it can do any- thing to promote their increase and influence; and secondly, LAY READERS. In four parishes in this couut}'^, and one in Wiltshire, appointments have been made. The license of the Bishop is in the following terms : — "Geoi'ge, by Divine perniissinii Bishop of Salisbury. To our well beloved in Christ, Greeting. — We do by these presents grant unto you, of whose faithfulness and competent knowledge we ai'e well assured, our coniUiission to execute the oflice and perform the duties of a Lay Reader, in the parish of , in our diocese and jurisdiction, on the nomination of the Reverend , and we do hereby authorise you to read the Word uf God, and explain the same to such persons in the said parish as the incumbent shall direct; to read the appointed lessons in the parish church, and also to read publicly in the schoolrooms, or in any other jjlace allowed by us, such portions of the morning and evening service as we shall appoint and direct; and also to read and expound some portion of Hnly Scripture, or to read such godly humily or discourse as the incumbent may approve. And we exhort you to seek out persons not baptized, or sick, and to make them known to the incumbent ; and to give diligent heed to prayer and the study of the Holy Scriptures, and to be an example of godliness, sobriety, and brotherly love. And we do liereby notify and declaie that this our commission shall remain valid, and have full force and authority, until either it shall be revoked \)y us or our succes.sors, or a fresh institution to the benefice shall have been made and completed. And so we com- mend you to Almighty God, whose blessing and favour we humbly pray may rest upon you and your work. Given nnder our hand and seal, &c." In one town parish this institution has been placed on a fair and full trial by the appointment of four highly qualified men. The rector of Bridport writes to tell 26 me that they have done, and are doing, and arc likely to do, ^uud scrvico for the Churclj ; tbat they conduct the service for the children in the schools, and feel that they may at any time be called ui)t)n to road the lessons in clnirch ; that he has heard of no single objection to the institution from any person of the smallest consider- ation ; that the men themselves seem to be deeply impressed with the gravity of the commission, if he may judge from the earnest way they are now working. Other testimony to the same effect might be given. LLEMENTAUY EDUCATION. I cannot altogether pass by the subject of elementary education. The two points to which I would refer are — 1. The position of our schools under the Elemen- tary Education Act ; and 2. The diocesan inspection of our schools in religious subjects. Persistent efforts are made in Parliament to render obligatory the formation of School Boards. No words, I think, can better give the answer to these attempts than those in which Mr. J. G. Talbot gave notice in the House of Commons that, on the order for the second reading of the Elementary Education (Compulsory Attendance) Bill, he would move " That this House cannot entertain the question of the universal establishment of School Boards until perfect liberty of religious teaching shall be secured to such Boards by the repeal of the 14th section of the Elementary Education Act (1S7U), and until such Boards are empowered to contribute to the support of voluntary schools within their district, where it may seem to be desirable." So long as it is by law forbidden to the Church to use her Prayer Book in a rate-sup- ported or rate-assisted school, so long must tije Church determine at whatever cost to maintain her own schools. A few days since I was visited by a gentleman, Mr. Allen, an agent of the l:](lucation league. He was on a circuit of enquiry, and in a letter which reached me just as he himself arrived, beginning "At the request of J\Ir. iJixon, M.P. for Birriiiugham," he said that his object was "to try and ascertain what were the real objections of the clergy to the establishment of School Boards in the country parishes." He said he wished to know " my conclusions as to the attitude of the rural clergy towards School Boards with compulsion." I think 1 left him thoroughly persuaded that nothing could remove the objection to the Boards short of the removal of the bondage under which the Act now holds them by the 14th clause — a clause, be it always remembered, not in Mr. Foster's original Bill, but, through the cleverness of Bome aud the weukuess of others, let in as a compromise 2^ afterwards — a clause not to be fouud in the Scotch Bill. From what he bad himself seeu too and heard, in the West he had fouud out the mistake of attributing this attitude to the rural clergy alone, lie had learned that towu clergy and town people were of the same mind, aud that in these parts, as well as generally throughout the country, the doctrines of those who are at this time in a majority in Birmiugham are not generally held. We have in this diocese abundant examples of town parishes and of country parishes in which great efforts on behalf of voluntary schools have been made, and these with the best results. But I think we have reason to point with especial satisfaction to the two chief towns of our diocese— Salisbury and Dorchester — as model districts, not single parishes, but far more difficult in this matter to deal with, sets of parishes, in which a zealous efifort for the maintenance of definite religious teaching combined with full respect for libei'ty of conscience has resulted in the case of Dorchester (where to their great credit all personal aud parochial considerations were for the purpose put aside) in a full supply for the town of all educational requirements without a Board, and in the other case of Salisbury, in the same full sup{)ly without the intro- duction of a single rate supported or rate assisted school. The last School Board election in Salisbury very clearly set forth the sentiments of men there. The four candidates who favoured the maintenance of the existing schools and definite religious teaching had, on the average, nearly 1,100 votes apiece in excess of the votes given to their four opponents, being a long way towards a proportion of three votes to one. Such con- tests as these have taken place throughout the country, and take place they must as long as the llth Clause of the Act is law. Whether in London or in any place where there is a Board candidates will, as a rule, have to stand upon the view they take of the religious question. It must continue to be the duty of Church- men, with others, to fight for the maintenance of full liberty of religious teaching — and this necessity arises in the main out of what I hold to be the unjust con- ditions imposed by that clause. Mr. Wilkinson, the secretary of the Board of Education, was visited by the same gentleman, and, in writing to me on the subject, he says "I told him, that as regards the clergy, the real obstacle was the Cowper Temple Clause, which was, in fact, a violation of religious liberty, forbidding the teaching of those catechisms and formularies which all concerned in the school desired to teach. If Mr. Disou 8 desired to have the co-operation of the clergy in the furmatiou of School Boards let him go in for the repeal of tlie clauise iu the uame of religious liberty." As regaids landlords and tenant*, apart from religious and political reasons, there is naturally a disinclination to overthrow an existing system, which works well and gives at a small cost general satisfaction, iu order to introduce another — novel, expensive, and seriously ohjected to by those who have hitherto done the educational work of the country. Happily we can still report that throughout the diocese of Salisbury men are very generally of one mind in this matter. It is un- necessary to refer to the 2iith Clause of the Act, for it is now clearly seen it can be defended on the plainest ground even liberty for the poor man. With regard to School Boards, it should be noticed that when statistics of the number of the population under Boards are given there is a risk of mistake as to the force of those statistics. For instance, Lord Sandon the other night when moving the vote for education says " Besides London, 104 boroughs representing a population of 5,500,000, out of 22i boroughs with a po{)ulatiou of d,531,b'J2 were iiuder School Boards. There were also under School Boards 717 civil parishes out of 14,072 with a population of 12,913,387. The net result of this was that 10,404,507 of the population were under School Boards, against 12,217,759 who were not in the same position, and that by the middle of next year about half of th« population would be under Boards." Let it, however, be clearly understood that although there may perhaps by that time be Boards iu places where half the population reside, yet that by June, lb75 (when full school provision is expected to be making or made), it is the outside calculation that in School Board schools there will be provision for 500,000, or one-eighth of the whole number thus provided for. In the last returns to the end of 1573 the number is but 125,000, and thusfarshortasyet of eveu this expected provision for 500,000. But the truth is that School Boards sometimes have no rate supported or rate assisted schools ; sometimes in large places they have only one, or two, or very few schools belonging to them. The School Boards may exist iu those places, but voluntary schools are often doing tiie work of education. Witness Salisbury, Liverpool, Manchester, Kottingham and numbeiless other j)lacep, where these Board Schools are either none or few. And this may remind us that iu an Act passed with the expressed intention of giving even op* portunityfor the establishment of voluntary and of School Board schools — there is this inequality. Liberty is given to a district to part with a voluntary system and intro- duce a Board. Tliis may be done suddenly and unad- visedly, and be repented of ; but, as our Bishop said in the Synod, Vcgtirjia nulla rctrorsam. A vast amount of good will be effected by the pressure which the Act has brought to bear upon the country for a due supply of schools ; but there are one or two serious blots in the Act which must, as long as they continue to exist, pre- vent the general adoption of the Board School system. When discussing the subject with ilr. Allen I asked him whether he really could support what was called un- sectarian teaching — whether such a thing could be defined, and, as a general system, worked out, and whether the League had not been compelled to reject such an idea. To which he replied that he was himself a Churchman, and entirely in favour of the Church teaching definitely her doctrines, only that he wished to dissociate that teaching from school work. But when reminded that this separation of religious instruction frum school work was the very thing the people of this country would not consent to — that a secular school was scarcely known out of Bir- mingham — it appeared to me that he had to confess the weakness of the position of the League. I am not aware that I have met any Churchman who has upon religious grounds defended the principle of the llth Clause ; but in order to illustrate its natural results I must show you its working in a parish of Wiltshire — Donhead St. Mary. A School Board has just been introduced there consist- ing of five members. We cannot consider the question, of the necessity for the introduction of this Board nor the question whether it may hereafter prove to be an institution acceptable to the parish when theconsequences of its introduction are appreciated ; but I will read you a paper publicly set forth by this new body. It runs thus : — "A resolution of the Donhead St. Mary School Board, carried uuanimously June 1st, 1S74. "That it is a matter of the highest importance that children educated at the public expense should be instructed in tliose piinciples of Christiaiiitj' which are fundamental, yet not deno- minational; and that in the Donhead fet. Maiy School Board School tlie children shall, as far as their comprehension may permit, be instructed in such doctrines as are plainly set forth in the following passages from Scripture [I read the p:ussages as they stand un the pai^er] : — " ' In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the word was God.' ' And the Word was made flesh an4 dwelt aniong as.'— John i., 1, 14. 30 " ' Christ was once offereil to bear tlie sina of many.'— Heb. ix., 28. ' Hut Cliri.st after He li^nl ottered one s;icrilice for ever sat tlowij on the right of God.'— Ileb. x., 12. " ' All li.ive sinnetl and come .short of the glory of God.'— Rom. iii. 2.3. ' If any iniin sin, we have an a impose them on their own congrega- tions, which would lead to endless confusion ; but the Church of England, exercising that authority whieli belongs to all national Churches, ought to detine and declare publicly by her syuodical judgments what things in her services are to be regarded as obligatory and what may be considered as indiilerent. And she ought, as an Established Church, to seek for legal sanction from the Crown and from Parliament, for these her authoritative definitions and declarations. These were the jirinci[)les on which our Book of Common Prayer was framed and revised. To illustrate this by examples — The eastward position of the celebrant at the prayer of Consecration in the Holy Communion has been con- demned and prohibited by the Court of Final Appeal. And the position at the north end has been declared to be the legal one. If this question were to be argued again this judg- ment would probably be re-afiirmed. My reasons for this opinion are as follows : — The Church of Englanari8h ; and next, the sanction of the ordinary. Both these guarantees against innovations and excesses may be obtained in the Church of England, as well as in that of America. A few years ago the adoption of the surplice in the pulpit iu some parish churches produced a commotion. An