these canons which are declaratory of the ancient usage and law of the Church of England, received and allowed here, which in that respect, and by virtue of such ancient allowance will bind the laity." [See also Blackstone's Comm. Introd., sect. iii.]

THE STATUTE LAW.

Since the Act of Submission of 1534 most of the ecclesiastical legislation of the country has been embodied in Acts of Parliament, the canons of 1603 being a conspicuous exception. Thus the Book of Common Prayer is embodied in the Statute 14 Car. II. ch. 4, the Act of Uniformity of 1662; and the Thirty-nine Articles of Religion are substantially, though not verbally, incorporated into 13 Eliz. ch. 12, the Act which makes subscription to them necessary on the part of the clergy, as well as into the more recent Act 28 and 29 Victoria, ch. 122. There is also a continuous stream of parliamentary legislation with reference to the temporalities and civil rights of the Church, and the bulk of the ecclesiastical statutes has grown to very large dimensions during the last century.1

To sum up, therefore, it may be said in conclusion that

The growth of Parliamentary legislation for the Church may be seen by the following table :

the following are the several elements of church law as it is now in force in the Church of England :

1. The common law of the realm.

2. The English canon law, ancient and modern, so far as it is not opposed to the common and statute law, or to the royal prerogative.1

3. Foreign canon law, so far as it has been accepted by custom or by Act of Parliament.

4. The statute law of the realm, including the Book of Common Prayer with its Rubrics, and the

Thirty-nine Articles of Religion.

It need only be added that these several elements are all binding on the clergy, but that modern canons are not binding on the laity, except in those cases in which they hold ecclesiastical offices.

The Attorney-General, arguing on behalf of Lord Penzance in the recent cases of Mr. Dale and Mr. Enraght [L.R. 6 Q.B.D. 376], contended that the Canons of 1603 were not binding upon Lord Penzance as Judge of the Arches Court, because he was a layman and "a lay Judge of one of the Queen's Courts ;" and he threw doubts upon the binding force of the Canons even as to the Clergy; but these views were not accepted by the Court.

A

Chapter III.

THE ADMINISTRATION OF CHURCH LAW.

S the laws relating to the Church are of a mixed character, so the judicial administration of those laws is assigned to various tribunals, in which the ecclesiastical and the secular elements are combined.

All questions of civil rights are of course within the jurisdiction of the Secular Courts; and so it has long been ruled that questions of dilapidations, which were once decided only in the Ecclesiastical Courts, are the subject of an action at common law. But questions respecting the orthodoxy of the clergy, their conduct in their ministrations, and their morals, are subject to the jurisdiction of the bishops, with the right of appeal from a lower to a higher court, and ultimately to the Sovereign in Council. The same authorities administer some classes of laws also in the case of the laity, such as those relating to their moral discipline in respect to incontinency, neglect or wrongdoing in the offices of churchwarden or parish clerk, the payment of some small tithes and dues, and illegal interference with the fabric and ornaments of churches.1

The jurisdiction of Ecclesiastical Courts in respect to the recovery of church rates ceased with the abolition of compulsory

The ordinary ecclesiastical tribunal of first instance in which the laws of the Church are administered in such cases is the Consistory Court of each diocese. Every bishop is, ex-officio, the judex ordinarius for his diocese in respect to all matters which come within the range of ecclesiastical law, and his "Consistory" is the ancient "Court Christian" in which his ordinary judicial authority is exercised. He does not in practice preside over this Court in person, but by the "official principal" of his Court, who is in modern times always also his vicargeneral, and usually combines the two offices under the name of Chancellor of the Diocese. The Archdeacon's Court also has jurisdiction in certain cases, especially with reference to parish clerks.

But in the case of criminal offences charged against any of his clergy, the bishop's mode of proceeding is regulated by recent legislation, which has substituted another tribunal for the ancient Diocesan Court. This is contained in the Act 3 and 4 Vict., ch. 86, entitled "An Act for better enforcing Church Discipline."1

Under this Act, wherever a clerk in holy orders is charged before the bishop, or there exists scandal or evil report of him, as offending against the laws ecclesiastical, the bishop may do one of two things:

[A] Issue a commission of inquiry to five persons who will examine the case, take evidence, and hear the accused,

church rates in 1868. Matrimonial, divorce, and testamentary causes were, in 1857, transferred to secular Courts of Probate and Divorce. Appendix II.

I

in person or by his legal advisers, and report whether there is a prima facie case against him or not.

This commission must not issue till fourteen days' notice has been given to the accused of the intention to issue it, the nature of the charge, and the name of the accuser, if any. Should the commission report a prima facie case, then

(1.) The bishop may (with the consent of the accused) pronounce sentence against him without further proceedings. If the accused do not consent, articles of charge must be drawn up, signed by an advocate, filed in the registry, and served on the accused. These articles may again be admitted by the accused, in which case the bishop will pronounce sentence at once. If not, the bishop hears the cause with three assessors, one of whom is to be an advocate or barrister of a certain standing, and another the dean of the cathedral, or an archdeacon, or his chancellor.

From the decision of the bishop an appeal lies to the Court of Appeal of the province (that is, the Arches Court for Canterbury, the Chancery Court of York for York),1 and thence to the Privy Council, the appeal being heard by the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council, who report to the Sovereign; this report is confirmed by Order in Council, and is thereupon final.

(2.) After the report of the commission the bishop may, instead of hearing the cause himself, send it by letters of request to the Court of Appeal of the province direct.

[B] Without issuing a commission, or taking any step, the bishop may at once send the case in the first instance to the Court of Appeal of the province, by letters of I See page 32.