« PreviousContinue »
Thou that breath'st life into th' unthinking clod,
When duty call’d me forth to risk my all,
For all these mercies, just returns from me
In brighter mansions may I have my share,
Febr: 12. Die meo natali.
Malachy.-The famous prophecies of the Irish Saint, Malachy (Abbot of Bangor, and Archbishop of Armagh), in which the vicissitudes of the papacy are foretold, are believed to have been fabricated in the conclave of 1590, by the partisans of Cardinal Simoncelli.
Glass Bell.—Another church bell of glass has been cast in Sweden ; its diameter is six feet, and its tone is said to be beyond comparison finer than that of any metal bell.
PSALMODY.-It was in the course of the sixteenth century that the psalmody of England, and the other protestant countries, was brought to the state in which it now remains, and in which it is desirable it should continue to remain. For this psalmody we are much indebted to the Reformers of Germany, especially Luther, who was himself an enthusiastic lover of music, and is believed to have composed some of the finest tunes, particularly the Hundredth Psalm, and the hymn on the Last Judgment.
DAWE AND NOCKOLDS v. WILLIAMS. (By Letters of Request from the Archdeaconry of Huntingdon.) This was a cause or business of the William Firth, Thomas Woodman ;' office of the Judge promoted by William that he, the said Henry Williams, then Dawe and Martin Nockolds, respect- entered the said Church, accompanied ively, parishioners, inhabitants, and by Adam Morton, an inhabitant of church wardens of the parish of Tring, the said parish, and having taken his in the countyof Hertford, Archdeaconry seat with the said Adam Morton, in of Huntingdon, Diocese of Lincoln, his pew, did, during the time of divine and Province of Canterbury, against service therein, and immediately after Henry Williams, also a parishioner of the Rev. Charles Lacy, the minister the said parish, for his soul's health, then officiating in the said Church, &c. and, especially, for having “created had concluded reading the Nicene a disturbance in the parish church of creed, stand up in the said pew, and, Tring aforesaid, during the time of not regarding the sacredness of the divine service therein," and for having place in which he then was, and with“quarrelled, chode, and brawled, by out any lawful authority whatever, words, in the said Church, during such did, irreverently, read aloud a notice
It was a proceeding in this in the words, or to the precise effect, Court, the Court of Arches, in the first of the said written notice, so affixed, instance, by virtue of " letters of as aforesaid, on the door of the said request,” under the hand and seal of Church-and did, moreover, then, and the “ Commissary of the Lord Bishop there, irreverently, and indecently, of Lincoln, in, and throughout the chide and brawl, in the presence and Archdeaconry of Huntingdon.” hearing of the congregation then as
The criminal charge, as contained in sembled in the said Church-and did, the third of six articles, exhibited on thereby, and by so reading aloud the the part of the promovents, was as fol- said notice, as aforesaid, interrupt the lows—that “on the morning of Sun- performance of divine service, create a day, the 24th of August, 1823, and great disturbance in the said Church, during the time of divine service in and give great offence to the congrethe parish Church of the parish of gation assembled therein." The artiTring aforesaid, he, the said Henry cles concluded by praying that the Williams, (the defendant) not being a defendant might be " duly corrected churchwarden, overseer, or officer of for such offence according to the exthe said parish, did enter into the porch igency of the law"-might be “admoof the said Church, and affix, and leave nished to refrain from the like behaviour affixed, on the door of the said Church, in future”—and might“ be condemned a written notice, in the words and in the costs of the suit." figures, or to the effect following, to In opposition to the admission of the wit—Take notice, that a vestry will "articles," it was submitted, that the be held in this Church on Friday next, act charged upon the defendant had the 29th day of August, at three nothing of that malus animus on the o'clock, to choose new Churchwardens face of it, which, it was contended, was in the place of the present ones.' — essential to the offence of “brawling." Signed George Kingsley, Charles What, it was said, is the intrinsic chaBelcher, Overseers; Adam Morton, racter of the act? When any thing is
* Articles against a parishioner for "brawling," &c. by reading a “ notice of vestry," in church, during divine service, without due authority, admitted to proof.
An objection to the jurisdiction of the Court to entertain a suit for “brawling" by “ letters of request," overruled.
to be proposed to the parishioners re- pose," and that hence the Court will lative to the general management of infer “malice,” the answer is. 1st, the parish, the Churchwardens are the non constat, that this was a calling of a proper persons to call a meeting of the vestry for an illegal purpose-but even parish. If the object of that meeting granting it to have been, still, 2dly, it be personal against the Churchwardens was not a calling of a vestry for any (as in this instance), it may be (as the purpose so illegal, on the face of it, fact was in this instance) that they that the Court will infer any malus refuse to call a vestry. What, then, animus in the defendant on that account. are the parish to do? Are they not to The power of parishioners to remove meet in vestry at all ?
their Church wardens, in case of their hardly be. But if parishioners are to wasting the goods of the parish (or, it meet, legally, in vestry, a prior “no- may be presumed, in case of their other tice," in Church, similar to the one in misbehaviour) is pretty broadly laid question, is absolutely requisite under down in many books of authority. Mr. Sturges Bourne's act; which says “ Churchwardens,” says Mr. Justice not a word as to whom vestries shall Blackstone, “may not waste the be called by, or at all prescribes the Church goods, but may be removed course to be pursued, when the Church- by the parish, and called to account.” wardens, the persons authorized to call And it is said to have been ruled by them in the first instance, refuse or the Court of King's Bench, two centudecline-an omission, possibly, fit to ries ago, that parishioners may displace be supplied in the event of any revision their Churchwardens, though chosen of that act. Under these circumstances, for a time certain, before the expiration it should seem, prima facie, that such of that time. And indeed it should notice of vestry must be given in seem, as the law now stands, pretty Church, without the authority of the essential that parishioners should have Church wardens; and that the parish, some such power. “In ordinary rein deputing one of their body to that pairs,” says Bishop Gibson, the office, took the only step capable of Churchwardens need not take the being taken. The notice in question, sense of the parishioners; and, though even as pleaded, was signed by the indiscreet or over expensive, are entioverseers, and other (respectable) pa- tled to be reimbursed by the parish for rishioners : so that the parishioner what they have expended, so it hath deputed to the office of reading it in been truly expended, and without proChurch, was, surely, sufficiently autho- fit to themselves; because the parish rized, to protect him from being dealt have constituted them their trustees. with, for having merely executed that Nor have the parishioners, he adds, office, as a "brawler." Other modes, any remedy but by complaint to the indeed, may be suggested, in which the ordinary, in order to their removal." parish, possibly, might have proceeded. And Prideaux, in his “Office of It may be said, for instance, that they Churchwardens,” is even still more might have moved the Court of King's pointed as to parishes being, in these Bench for a mandamus to the Church- respects, in the discretion, (it might wardens to call a vestry. But; not to almost be said at the mercy) of their mention the circuity and expensiveness Churchwardens. Gibson, it will be of this (the only mode which readily seen, has coupled this power of parishsuggests itself) such suggestions, it ioners to remove their Churchwardens was said, are foreign to the argument; with the necessity, or at least the prothat confining itself, as it does, merely priety, of a complaint to the ordinary, to shewing, that the act charged evinces in the first instance, in order to such nothing of that malus animus on the their removal. But this, probably, face of it, essential to the offence of might be the very course meant to be brawling; and which ynless the Court pursued in the present instance : it infers, from the intrinsic character of was not necessary in the published the act itself, it is bound, it was argued, “notice of vestry" objected to, to enter to reject the articles.
into any particulars of the course Should it be said that “this was a meant to be pursued by the parish. calling of a vestry for an illegal pur- “ In order to choose new Churchwardens," might well stand for “ in the archbishop, bishop, or other supeorder to take the requisite, legal steps, rior ordinary, to take, treat, examine, for the choosing of new Church- or determine the matter before him or wardens” — leaving those steps to be his substitutes—and that to be done in ascertained by the vestry when actually cases only where the law, civil or canon, met.
doth affirm execution of such request Under these circumstances, it was or instance of jurisdiction to be lawful submitted, that the mere reading of a and tolerable.' Now it is to be colnotice of vestry, at the time and in the lected from this correction (and that to manner charged, was no brawling on be done in cases only, &c.] that executhe face of it—the Church wardens, the tion of such request, or instance, of proper persons to call vestries on parish jurisdiction, is lawful and tolerable but matters, refusing to convene a vestry in certain cases: it were a vain correc(as they naturally would) for the pur- tion (as laid down by the Court of pose specified — and Mr. Sturges King's Bench in the case of Jones v. Bourne's act providing that no vestry Jones, reported by Lord C. J. Hobart,) shall be holden without a previous if it were lawful and tolerable in all. notice in Church of the holding of such “No doubt," said the Court of King's vestry, and of the purpose for which it Bench in the case in Hobart, “ the is intended to be held.
statute in question was not made withShould the alleged offence be argued out advice and hearing of the canonists, to consist in the violation of the rubric, and therefore cannot be supposed to be the answer is, that the proceeding in so ignorantly penned; and the case, this instance is not as for any (real or concerning so much the ease of the supposed) violation of the rubric, but subject, deserves much consideration.” for the offence of brawling. The cita- Now certainly neither the law, civil or tion is in that form--so are the arti- canon, can affirm the execution of such cles—which are silent as to any violation instance or request of jurisdiction to be of the rubric, and only object to the “lawful or tolerable" in the case in defendant the offence of brawling question. For it is a proceeding, in Indeed, as to a violation of the rubric, substance, under a statute, and conany proclamation in Church during the sequently, it cannot be supposed to be time of divine service, unless " by the one of those cases ever in the contemminister himself,” and “of something, plation of the law, civil or canon—it is either prescribed in the book of com- a proceeding too, under a statute, submon prayer, or enjoined by the king, sequent, in date, to the “bill of citaor the ordinary of the place,” is a vio- tions"-but that is not all-it is a lation of the rubric--so that the rubric, proceeding under a statute which exin the particular question, is violated, pressly limits the proceeding to be without offence, in too many instances, * before the ordinary of that place to render it probable that the Court where the offence shall have been comwould deem its violation, in the present mitted.” Consequently this was denied instance, a fit subject for a criminal to be one of those cases in which it was prosecution ; detached from that other “ lawful or tolerable" that the suit offence, the offence of brawling, which should be sent up, by letters of request, the articles charge it to have involved. from the inferior to the superior, ordi
Lastly, it was submitted, that some nary: Nor is the position, it was said, objections lay to the Court's entertain- so taken up upon principle, destitute of ing a suit for brawling by “letters of authority, for there is a “suggestion" in request," on the following considera- Winch Entries 570) for a prohibition tions:
to a proceeding before the archbishop, By the “ bill of citations," none are in a cause for brawling, transmitted by to be cited out of their dioceses, except letters of request, (the identical case in in certain excepted cases, the fifth being point) on this very ground. The sug“in case that any bishop or any infe- gestion is express—« quod cognitio ofrior judge,having under him jurisdiction fensæ (si qua offensa) per statutum in his own right and title, or by com- prædictum ad ordinarium loci, et non mission, make request or instance to ad alium quemcunque judicem spiritualem, pertinet ac spectat: ac prædicta the general authority under which, nor offensa, in articulis, sive interrogatoriis the persons by whom, vestries are to be prædictis, superius contentis (si qua called: it only added some further forspiritualis offensa fuisset) ab ordinario malities in the mode of calling ; such as loci ad aliquem alium judicem spiritua- directing the notice to be put up on the lem per aliquas literas requisitionum Church door, and that it shall be given punienda fore, mitti non debeat.” It a certain number of days before the was admitted, however, at the same vestry is to meet. time, that suits for brawling, by letters Suits have been entertained in this of request, had been entertained by the Court for offences of the description Court of Arches in some recent instan- contained in the present articles; as in ces—but then the objection does not the case of “ Thompson v. Tapp,” and seem to have been taken in either, or
other cases. any, of those cases. Upon these con- Here, then, being an offence sufficisiderations it was prayed that the Court ently laid in the articles; and the artiwould put an end to the suit by reject- cles sufficiently conforming to the ing the articles.
citation, they must be admitted by the The substance of the argument in Court. support of the articles will be found The proceeding is also under the expressed in the judgment.
statute of brawling. That statute was Judgment.—Sir John Nicholl.—This intended to repress all interruption and is a proceeding as well under the general disturbance, even by words only, of the ecclesiastical law, as under the statute congregation met for public worship. of Edward the Sixth, against the defen- It has been so construed. Here it is dant Henry Williams, a parishioner of not necessary to express any opinion Tring, for “creating a disturbance in whether simply reading a notice, wholly the parish Church of Tring, during the unconnected with any other circumtime of divine service," and for " stances of irregularity, would amount relling, chiding, and brawling, by words, to such an offence as would form a fit in the said Church, during such time.” subject for prosecution ; since it is ob
The admission of the articles" in vious, that a private parishioner's prothis case, the third of which expresses claiming in the Church a notice calling the particulars of the charge, is opposed: a vestry, in the middle of the year, for but they appear to the Court sufficiently the purpose of choosing new Churchto contain the ecclesiastical offence wardens, must be connected, prima charged. A private parishioner has no facie least, with some contest and right during the time of divine service, dispute existing in the parish; and conand of his own authority, to publish sequently, must have tended to disturb such a notice as is here stated, or any the congregation, and to call off their other notice in the Church. The rubric attention from the solemn purpose for expressly states, that “nothing shall be which they were assembled. The serproclaimed or published in the Church vice was not over; for it is not ended during the time of divine service, but by till the grace or blessing is pronounced, the minister, nor by him any thing but dismissing the congregation. what is prescribed by the rules of this The article pleads "that he did morebook, or enjoined by the king or the over, irreverently, there chide and ordinary of the place." And the rubric, brawl.” If it be intended to prove as a part of the book of common prayer, any other words and expressions,* they is confirmed by act of parliament, and should be set forth in the article, so as constitutes a part of the statute law of to give the defendant an opportunity of the land.
cross-examining to, and contradicting Vestries, for church matters, regularly them. are to be called “by the Churchwardens It has been suggested, upon the with the consent of the minister.” The authority of some ancient dicta, that late act of parliament neither altered under the true construction of the
This was disclaimed by the counsel for the promovent; and the word “ moreover' was, upon this, struck out of the articles.
VOL. XIV. NO. VIII.