STATEMENT OF THE WHOLE EFFECTS OF QUEEN ANNE'S BOUNTY.

ECCLESIASTICAL COURTS,

Two Bills were brought forward in the House of Commons on Thursday March 12th, by the Attorney-General, founded on the Report of the Eccle siastical Commissioners. The first was to improve the administration of justice in Ecclesiastical Courts. The Attorney-General said the object of this bill would be to consolidate 300 or 400 courts dispersed all over the country, and to give their jurisdiction to one court, to sit in London or wherever his Majesty should please to appoint. The court of Delegates it was proposed to abolish, and to transfer their jurisdiction to the Privy Council. The effect of the present state of the laws on these subjects was, in many instances, a denial of justice. It was proposed to consolidate all these jurisdictions into one court, which would prevent the present inconvenience. It was proposed that testamentary and matrimonial causes should remain in the Ecclesiastical Court; but that the question on tithes and the conduct of the Clergy should be entirely taken out of their jurisdiction. The other was a bill to provide for the better maintenance and discipline of the Clergy. This measure provided that in order to procure speedy justice a court should be established in every county, () with power to take cognisance of all matters relating to the Clergy-and that authority should be given to follow up its decisions with speedy execution. An appeal will be from it to the Metropolitan.

INCORPORATED SOCIETY FOR PROMOTING THE ENLARGEMENT, BUILDING, AND REPAIRING OF CHURCHES AND CHAPELS. A MEETING of this society was held at their chambers in St. Martin's Place, on Monday, the 16th of March; his Grace the Archbishop of York in the chair. There were present the Bishops of London, St. Asaph, Hereford, Chester, Bristol, Gloucester, Bath and Wells, and Lichfield and Coventry; Rev. Archdeacon Pott; Rev. Dr. D'Oyly; Samuel Bosanquet, Esq.; N. Connop, jun., Esq.; H. J. Barchard, Esq.; James Cocks, Esq.; J. S. Salt, Esq.; Joshua Watson, Esq.; Rev. T. Bowdler; Rev. H. H. Norris; Rev. Arch ́deacon Cambridge; William Cotton, Esq., and others of the committee.

Among other business transacted, grants, varying in amount according to the necessity of the case, were voted towards restoring the church at Evesham, in the county of Worcester; repewing the church at Brampton, in the county of Huntingdon; enlarging the chapel of St. James, at Ashted, near Birming'ham; building a chapel at Oswestry, in the county of Salop; enlarging, by rebuilding, the church at Stoke Canon, in the county of Devon; building a church in the parish of St. Botolph, Colchester; building a church in the parish of St. John, Westminster; enlarging the church at Upton, St. Leonards, in the county of Gloucester; building a chapel at Hadlow Down, in the parishes of Buxted and Hayfield, in the county of Sussex; enlarging, by rebuilding, the church at Ysceifiog, in the county of Flint; building a church at Botley, in the county of Southampton; building a chapel at Chigwell, in the county of Essex.

TRIALS.

Rolls' Court-Saturday, Jan. 31.

THE ATTORNEY GENERAL v. THE BISHOP OF LLANDAFF. THIS was a petition praying for the confirmation of the Master's report, which was made in pursuance of a reference directing the Master to approve

of a scheme for the application of part of a charitable fund bequeathed by the late Lord Craven. The testator had bequeathed the residue of his property to trustees in trust, to apply 100l. a-year towards the maintenance and education of two scholars in the Universities of Oxford and Cambridge, and he directed the remainder of his residuary estate to be applied in the redemption of Christian captives in Turkey and Barbary. A difficulty had arisen as to the latter part of the charitable bequest, inasmuch as it appeared that there were no Christian captives, or none at least could be found, in Turkey or Barbary, to be redeemed. Under these circumstances, a reference had been directed to the Master to approve of a scheme for the application of that part of the fund directed to be applied to an object which failed, and the Master had accordingly approved of a scheme for applying the residuary fund towards the maintenance and education of four scholars, instead of two scholars, in the Universities of Oxford and Cambridge.-The report was confirmed.

Court of King's Bench-Saturday, Jan. 31.

(Sittings in Banco.)

THE KING v. FOSSETT.

THIS was a rule obtained by the Attorney-General for a mandamus_commanding the defendant, who was Vicar of Leeds, to proceed to an election of churchwardens for the eight divisions of the parish of Leeds.

Mr. Cresswell this day shewed cause against this rule: he stated that it was customary to meet for the purpose of appointing churchwardens for each division; the vicar appoints, and he did appoint a churchwarden, who was elected; a poll was demanded, and the question was whether the poil should proceed at once, or whether it should be proceeded with on another day; those present demanded that the poll should go on immediately, but the chairman, who was the vicar, proposed that he should adjourn the meeting, and take counsel's opinion on it; there was then considerable confusion, and the chairman quitted the chair. Robert Baker was then called to the chair, and he did not resume the proceedings where they left off, but took the nomination over again, and he stated that a person of the name of Buttery had a large majority. There was then a cry for a poll, but the chairman, without proceeding to a poll, entered Buttery's name in the book as elected; he then went on with the other names, and the others were chosen for every division without opposition. One of the affidavits stated that the deponent went over immediately to York, and entered a caveat, and the archdeacon refused to swear these churchwardens in. The affidavits stated that it had been the custom at Leeds to proceed to the election of one churchwarden first, and therefore the proper way would have been to have proceeded with the poll for one before the others were proposed, and that it was in the discretion of the chairman. If the mandamus was issued, there would be two elections at Leeds within a fortnight. His affidavits stated that the election had been conducted according to immemorial custom.

The Attorney-General contended that the rule ought to be made absolute. It was sworn that the chairman had conducted himself in such a manner one would have thought impossible except for political purposes. He urged that the time of taking the poll was in the discretion of the officer. On the other side it was said that it was the immemorial custom that the poll should be taken immediately. He said it was absurd to say that the poll should take place immediately, to the interruption of all other business, for the intention of a poll was to take the deliberate and quiet opinion of the persons entitled to give their votes. (A laugh.)

Mr. Justice Littledale said that in time immemorial Leeds had not a vicar.

The Attorney-General added, that the vicar took the chair, and intended to take the poll at the most convenient time.

The Court said the rule must be made absolute.

BIRD V.

MR. JUSTICE LITTLEDALE delivered the judgment of the Court in this case, which was an action on the case brought by the plaintiff, as vicar of a parish, against the defendants, who were executors of his predecessor, for dilapidations. On the trial the jury had assessed the damages on the first count at 781. 48., and on the other counts at 100l. Some years since an enclosure had taken place in this parish, where the vicar was entitled to tithe of the commons, and it was considered to be of advantage to the persons interested in the lands to be exempt from tithe; and accordingly the commissioners under that enclosure act set out for the vicar 465 acres of the common as an equivalent for and in lieu of tithe. The question was whether the vicar was bound to keep the fences in repair. The Court considered that he was, and therefore gave judgment for the plaintiff,

Bail Court.

(Before Mr. Justice Patteson.)

IN RE SIMMS THE YOUNGER.

MR. AUSTEN moved for a rule to shew cause why a mandamus should not issue to Mr. Lane Simms the younger, commanding him to deliver up to Mr. Hopkins, of Brancaster, in Norfolk, the papers, books, and moneys, which had come into his hands as overseer there. The learned counsel said that the parties had been proceeded against before two justices, under the provisions of a late act of Parliament, and that on the appointment of another overseer application was made to him for the books, &c., in question, but they were refused. The application had been in accordance with the provisions of the 17th George II., and the learned counsel apprehended that it was a case in which a mandamus was necessary. The magistrates would not make a new rate till the former rates were collected, and this could not be done without the books in question. In the mean time there was no provision for the poor.-Rule to show cause granted.

CHURCH MATTERS.

THE opinion expressed in the last number of this journal, that the change so clamorously demanded by reforming churchmen, as well as by enemies without doors, was actually come, is justified by the appearance of the Report of the Commission, respecting bishopricks, in which two sees are extinguished, and the principles of a fresh distribution of revenue, and of partition of stalls are laid down; and consequently the time is come, too, for the exercise of those feelings with which it was said, on the same occasion, that such changes must be

The powers of the Crown to act by Commission, as to bishopricks, are very extensive. See the last paper on Convocation in this Magazine, and Hammond's or Stillingfleet's works.

regarded by those who hold the opinions which this journal, however feebly, has endeavoured to represent and to maintain.

The first exercise of these feelings is to suppress unnecessary reflections on what has happened. While change was only in prospect, it was the duty of those who thought it evil to say all that they could to prevent it, and to point out the mischiefs which, in their view, it threatened to bring with it. But no one who reasons can doubt that, from this moment, the change which the Report proposes is the least which (humanly speaking) can possibly happen. Other governments there may be, but what government will do less? The changes, therefore, recommended in the Report, must be considered, to all intents and purposes, as actually achieved,-the principles, on which they proceed, as actually established, and their effects as inevitable. The battle has been fought, in a word, and is lost. They who have lost it are unquestionably in that most forlorn condition of humanity that their past is utterly cut away from them. Their position is one, of a truth, which none can envy. Change will sweep away their old and long-cherished and precious recollections; but while the convictions of their understanding, and the affections of their heart remain unchanged, the stern voice of duty commands them to go forth into the struggle of life again. It commands them, too, as in the hour of domestic affliction, alike to turn away their eyes from the bright days of the youth and vigour of those whom they loved, and to abstain from lacerating their own feelings by unavailing inquiry into the origin and progress of the disease. It is enough that all— the youth and the vigour, the disease and its close-are past and gone. The threads are snapt, and the web of the future must be begun anew. The ancient streams are dried up; they must dig for new springs. The house of their fathers is to be re-constructed; their hands must not be slow to build on the foundations which are left, nor their hearts unwilling to pray that the glory of the new edifice may be greater than that of the first.

On this point another word or two may be added. It is first to be said, with respect to the Commission, that change did not originate with them, that the King's speech laid it down as a settled matter, and that the terms of the commission not only recognised it as 90 settled, but dictated to the members of that commission the points to which their attention was to be directed; so that they are not responsible for change, but for the choice of means only for executing what was decreed elsewhere.

There are other considerations respecting them still more material. They who consider who are the members of the present government, and who are the members of the commission, must confess that while, in both quarters alike, they would certainly expect a ready and anxious desire to promote every real improvement, and to go, indeed, as far as principle will allow, in promoting it, in both quarters also they would look for those who would resist all the evil they can, and would admit the least; who have no love for change, as change; and who would not be induced by anything but a sense of irresistible necessity, to yield to sweeping changes. The same recollections must lead also to a ready