14 



ANGLICAN CHURCHES. 



amounted to 45,853, while a balance of 2,681 

 was remaining at the banker's, besides invest- 

 ments and deposits to the sum of 35,868. 

 The total liabilities incurred and to be incurred 

 in the purchase of the site which is on the 

 south side of Dean's Yard amounted to 42,- 

 431, for the provision of which the resources 

 of the corporation were amply sufficient. The 

 Archbishop of Canterbury, speaking on the 

 adoption of the report, remarked on the prac- 

 tical value of the scheme, which would pro- 

 vide a house not only useful as a place of busi- 

 ness for the Church of England in England, 

 but also as a general meeting-point and ral- 

 lying -ground for the Anglican communion 

 throughout the world. He was anxious that a 

 good reference library should be formed as 

 soon as possible. A full collection of reports 

 of church work in all parts of the world was 

 needed. Valuable contributions concerning the 

 transactions of the American Church Conven- 

 tions had already been received from the Bish- 

 ops of Iowa and Albany. Formal possession 

 was taken of the site on the 21st of July, when 

 the first annual meeting of the corporation was 

 held, and suitable action was taken for accept- 

 ing the property. The purpose of the scheme 

 was defined to be for facilitating intercommun- 

 ion among the churches throughout the world. 

 The buildings already on the ground will be 

 occupied for the present, and the erection of 

 others or of better ones will be left to the fut- 

 ure, as the means and needs of the enterprise 

 may be developed. 



Church of England Temperance Society. A break- 

 fast was given by the Council and Executive of 

 this association, July 11, to the bishops attend- 

 ing the Lambeth Conference, for purposes of 

 consultations respecting the progress of the so- 

 ciety ; the movement against the liquor traffic 

 among the native races; and methods by which 

 the organization of the society abroad might 

 be accelerated and made more effective. The 

 Bishop of London presided. A letter was read 

 from the Bishop of New York representing that 

 great benefit had been derived in America from 

 the influence of the society. Resolutions were 

 adopted declaring that the importation of spir- 

 ituous liquors from England and other coun- 

 tries was having a disastrous effect upon native 

 races in the colonies and dependencies of the 

 British Empire, and recommending the forma- 

 tion of diocesan branches of the society. The 

 resolutions were supported by the Bishops of 

 Sydney, Cork, Pennsylvania, Huron, Colombo, 

 and Zulnland, and the Bishop Coadjutor of An- 

 tigua. The Bishop of Sydney declared that it 

 was absolutely impossible to exaggerate the 

 utterly disastrous effect which the traffic in 

 spirituous liquors was exercising everywhere. 



Powers of the Archbishop. The case of Read 

 and others vs. the Archbishop of Canter- 

 bury, involving an appeal of four members of 

 the Church of England resident in the diocese 

 of Lincoln against the refusal of the Archbish- 

 op of Canterbury of their request to cite the 



Bishop of Lincoln to answer allegations of of- 

 fense in matters of ritual, was decided by the 

 Judicial Committee of the Privy Council, Aug. 

 3, after an ex-parte hearing. The Bishop of 

 Lincoln was charged by the petitioners with 

 having offended in respect to the celebration of 

 the Communion by using lighted candles on 

 the Communion-table when they were not re- 

 quired for the purpose of giving light ; by mak- 

 ing at the same service and when pronouncing 

 the benediction, the sign of the cross ; by stand- 

 ing while reading the prayer of consecration 

 with his back to the people; and by deviating 

 in no fewer than ten ways from the ceremony 

 prescribed by the Book of Common Prayer. 

 The petitioners prayed the archbishop to cite 

 the inculpated bishop to answer these charges, 

 referring as precedents for the exercise of this 

 PO\V(.T to the case of " Lucy vs. the Bishop 

 of St. Davids" (1695). and of the Bishop of 

 Cloghan, which was cited in 1822 by the Arch- 

 bishop of Armagh. The archbishop replied 

 that, ''Considering the fact that in the course 

 of 300 years since the Reformation, there is no 

 other precedent " (than the Bishop of St. David's 

 case), " and considering the political and other 

 exceptional circumstances under which this 

 particular case was decided," he objected to act- 

 ing without instruction from a court of compe- 

 tent jurisdiction. The decision of the Judicial 

 Committee was to the effect that their lord- 

 ships were of the opinion that the archbishop 

 had jurisdiction in the case. They were also 

 of the opinion that the abstaining of the arch- 

 bishop from entertaining the suit was a matter 

 of appeal to Her Majesty. They desired to ex- 

 press no opinion whatever whether the arch- 

 bishop had or had not a discretion whether he 

 would issue the citation. They would humbly 

 advise Her Majesty to remit the case to the 

 archbishop, to be dealt with according to law. 

 The decision is considered an important one, in 

 that it establishes the right of the archbishop 

 to call bishops to account. 



Water in the Communion Service. A case was 

 heard before the Court of Arches of the Prov- 

 ince of Canterbury, February 14, in which the 

 Rev. S. J. Hawkes, of Pontebury, diocese of 

 Hereford, was charged with having adminis- 

 tered to communicants water instead of wine 

 at the celebration of the holy communion. The 

 defendant admitted that he had used water on 

 the occasion, as charged, but pleaded that he 

 had intended no offense against the rubrics. 

 He had not been aware beforehand that there 

 was to be a communion service. Finding no 

 wine in the flagon, he in his surprise ordered 

 the clerk to get something. The clerk had 

 brought water, and he had used it without 

 thinking to examine it. Lord Penzance, in giv- 

 ing his decision, while admitting the defend- 

 ant's excuses, thought that he had erred in 

 judgment; he should have made an explana- 

 tion or dismissed the congregation, and post- 

 poned the service. The court would do no 

 more than admonish the defendant against a 



