246 JOURNAL OF THE PLYMOUTH INSTITUTION. 
a meeting of the churchwardens and parishioners, and it was re- 
solved, “‘ That it is the opinion of this meeting that it is necessary 
to make some alterations in the Church for the better accommodation 
of the parishioners.” Resolved, “That it is the opinion of this 
meeting that the most eligible mode of effecting this alteration will 
be by dividing off the lower part of the Church as a separate place 
of worship.” Resolved, “That the committee be requested to 
obtain an estimate of the expense of effecting this alteration.” On 
the 18th December following there was another meeting, and it was 
resolved, ‘That it is the opinion of this meeting that the plan 
now submitted to the vestry by the churchwardens and. committee 
be approved, subject to such minor improvements as may occur to 
the churchwardens and committee to be necessary.” The church- 
wardens went for their plan to Torpoint, where resided a person 
called Hutchens. To him they applied, stated their wants, and he 
furnished them with a plan, which was approved by the church- 
wardens, committee, and parishioners of St. Andrew in the year of 
grace 1818. Observe the proposed arrangements. Utilizing the north 
and south porches, and erecting a permanent wall from north to south, 
the Church was to be divided into two portions, the western being 
the largest, both provided with large galleries, the one at the west 
end of the Church, the other at the east, and with altars opposite, 
furnished, of course, with three-deckers for the accommodation, as 
it appears from the plan, of the “clerk, reader, and preacher.” 
There is apparently no provision for vestries, but near the font at 
the west end of the larger chapel are two rooms, the one called the 
“‘minister’s registering room,” the other on the opposite side 
“ waiting-room for nurses.” The arrangement of the altars is worthy 
of note, and the entrances to the tower were to be stopped up. It is 
not very clear what Mr. Hutchins intended to do with the tower, 
perhaps take it down altogether, as useless in the new arrangements. 
Nothing more clearly shows the horrible state of things prevailing 
at this time. Puritanism never dared to suggest such a mutilation 
of the sacred edifice. ‘To this plan the churchwardens were desired 
to obtain the approval of the mayor and commonalty as patrons, 
the ordinary, the incumbent, and others ; but, whether this consent 
was not to be obtained, or for what other reason, I do not know, 
the scheme was dropped. 
But in 1824 further action was taken; and it was decided that 
something must be done, and eventually it was resolved that the 
