their respective orders at the Diocesan Synods, holding office for three years, and having similar qualifications to those required for election into the Diocesan Synod. This General Synod is to consist of three orders-Bishops, Clergy, and Laity who are to sit and deliberate together; but they are to be counted as two houses, one consisting of the bishops, the other of the representatives, and the former of these may retire at any time for consideration. The Bishops need not vote on any measure, unless they wish; and in no case shall they do so, until after the representatives have voted. These are wise precautions to prevent unnecessary collisions. Of course nothing can become a law of the Church if a majority of any one order opposes it.

But it was at this point of the Bishops' vote that the chief difficulty arose. Many who would not consent to merge the bishops amongst the clergy, and thus allow no more weight to the vote of the oldest and most experienced prelate than to the youngest and most unfledged curate in the Church, were nevertheless dissatisfied that an overwhelming majority of the clergy and of the laity in their respective orders might possibly be overborne by a majority of one in the house of Bishops. Perhaps the small number of the existing bench, consisting as it does of only twelve prelates, gave its chief weight to this feeling; and doubtless, if Ireland now enjoyed the other ten bishoprics which were suppressed some years ago by the Government, the feeling might have been considerably modified. And here we cannot forbear from throwing out the hint that an increase of such an episcopate as the Irish Church is now likely to possess (an episcopate of men chosen expressly for their fitness, and endowed with moderate incomes), and a restoration of some of those sees, the suppression of which has, to our certain knowledge, done much to injure the cause of true religion in the land, would be at once an indication of life, a pledge of progress, and a means of establishing the Church more firmly in the affections of her children.

"The Bishops' veto," as it was called, was a real difficulty; and though it was easy to show, as the Bishop of Derry did, that "veto" is but an anagram for "vote," and that people might as well speak of the clergy's veto, or the laity's veto, as the Bishop's veto, yet the undeniable fact stared men in the face, that seven bishops could at any time put a stop to the deliberate decision of the whole of the other two orders. It might be all very true that it was most unlikely such a collision would ever take place, and that the probability of such an event would be lessening continually, as Bishops selected (on account of their thorough confidence in them) by the clergy and laity were placed upon the Bench; still the feeling and

the objection recurred-" seven Bishops can bring the whole course of legislation to a dead lock;" and had it been possible to invest those seven with all the glorious associations that crowd around the memory of the seven Bishops who went to the Tower rather than submit to the despotism of King James, it would scarcely have sufficed to satisfy the Convention, or remove their objections.

Happily a compromise was found, and in this case the Duke of Abercorn was the fortunate suggestor of it; all parties seemed to accept it gladly, because whilst upon the one hand it did not annul episcopal authority, on the other it put a stringent check upon its undue exercise, and had the additional recommendation of having at least the appearance of evenhanded dealing between all the orders. The Duke's proposition was, that if any measure was passed by a majority of the clergy, and by a majority of the laity, but rejected by the Bishops, it could be brought up at a future Synod; and if it was then adopted by a majority of two-thirds of each order of representatives, it must become law, unless two-thirds of the whole Bench of Bishops (that is, eight) voted against it, and gave their reasons in writing.

We have said that this was the most hotly contested point the Convention had before it; and whilst we give all credit to the delegates for sincerity in dealing with it as a vital one, we are decidedly of opinion that the Act is likely to remain inoperative upon their statute-book, and that the collision which it guards against is a most improbable one. It is worth noting that, during the forty-one days of the Session, the Bishops, so far from using the power which was granted to them at an early stage of the proceedings, did not even vote so much as once; but whilst expressing their opinions frankly and boldly, left every disputed point to be settled by the votes of the clergy and laity.

We have more than once, in this paper, made mention of "the Representative Body" of the Church; and a few words will explain its character and functions. It is to be an administrative and not a legislative body, with financial rather than general duties. It is to be incorporated by Royal Charter, and enabled to hold lands, and perform other important functions defined by the Irish Church Act, such as dealing with the Government in respect to monies, and with the clergy as regards commutation; it will also act for the Church generally, under the control of the General Synod, in the management and investment of such funds as may be subscribed for the benefit of the Church. The members, sixty in number, have been already elected, and their names inspire universal confidence. The twelve bishops, twelve clergymen, and twenty

four laymen elected by the Dioceses, and twelve experts selected for their financial and legal skill, constitute this Representative Body, and only await the approval by the Government of the draft Charter, and its signature by the Crown, to enter upon their important duties.

Meantime they have met to put the recommendations of the General Synod, as regards a Sustentation Fund, into practical operation, and to arrange the terms on which they will deal with the commuting clergy. With reference to the former, the General Synod recommended that a general Sustentation Fund should be commenced immediately, and named the following as Treasurers:-the Lord Primate, Armagh; the Archbishop of Dublin, Dublin; the Earl of Meath, Bray; Right Hon. Judge Warren, Dublin; John Barlow, Esq., Bank of Ireland; Wm. Ewart, Esq., Belfast; and an account is opened in the Bank of Ireland, and the other principal Banks, entitled "The Church of Ireland Sustentation Fund Account." They also suggest that whilst the Sustentation Fund should be the principal object, no impediments should be thrown in the way of persons contributing money for special objects or particular places. Already some parishes have been raising money for their own endowment, and others have insured the Rector's life, so as to secure a sum at his death towards the sustenance of future pastors.

It will be very desirable (and this we believe to be the opinion of the Representative Body) that every clergyman should receive a fixed sum from the Central Sustentation Fund, so as not to be immediately and entirely dependent upon his congregation; but that every parish should be called upon to supplement this income in proportion to its wealth, numbers, and the duties to be performed. By the time these pages are in print a joint letter from all the bishops will have been read in every church throughout Ireland, explaining the demands of the present crisis, and urging the duty of systematic and liberal donations to the funds of the Church. This will be accompanied by a paper of recommendations from the Representative Body to the Vestries as to the best method of proceeding in the matter.

The subject of commutation has not been yet finally arranged. Should two-thirds of the clergy in any Diocese consent to commute, the Government (in addition to handing over the entire value of their life interest to the Representative Body, and making them, rather than the State, the paymasters of the existing clergy) will add 12 per cent., and in this way probably some gain might accrue to the Church. But it is plain that, in thus commuting, the clergy would be exchanging a higher security for a lower; at least it would be so in a financial, though perhaps not in a moral, point of view.

The General Synod, therefore, advised that it be a recom

mendation to the Representative Body to provide a Guarantee Fund which might secure the commuting clergy against possibility of risk in exchanging Government security for the security of the Church at large. It was universally felt, that without such security it would not be fair or honourable to ask the clergy to commute their incomes. In the words of Judge Longfield, who acted as one of the assessors, "There must not be any commutation, unless the punctual payment of their annuities to the clergy is made perfectly sure. It must, however, be borne in mind that this Guarantee Fund, or so much of it as would remain after the last annuitant had died, would become a part of the Sustentation Fund.

The direct gain in the shape of money by commutation may not be much (though some estimate it at a considerable sum), but the indirect advantage would be immense. If the fund created by commutation can be so increased from year to year, by subscriptions and donations, as to preserve the original fund intact, then, when the last annuitant has been paid off, the sum originally received in the way of commutation would remain as a permanent endowment for the Church. The possibility of accomplishing and securing such an endowment as this would induce many to make a liberal and systematic effort for the sustenance of the Church; and by beginning at once, and continuing the effort for some seventeen years, (which would be about the duration of the lives of the existing clergy,) a considerable provision would have been made for the Church of the future, by the present generation, and the burden rendered lighter on those who come after. We have no doubt that Irish churchmen will be true to themselves in this crisis of their history, and that even out of "their deep poverty they will abound unto the riches of their liberality." Already there have been generous gifts and noble acts of self-denial on the part of both rich and poor in the sister Church, and we are confident that the warm sympathy which has been felt by so many of the clergy and laity at the English side of the Channel, (the expression of which was so gratefully received and acknowledged by the General Convention of the Church of Ireland during its recent session,) will not end in mere words, but find a generous and substantial record in the acts and gifts of English churchmen.

It would not have been decent or delicate to proffer such help before, but now that our Irish brethren have commenced the work of sustentation, there can be no reason for any further delay. Heretofore the Church in Ireland has had many and peculiar claims upon our sympathy and regard, but all these claims are intensified and multiplied by her present position. Stripped of her honours, robbed of her property, and dis

established by the State, she has not surrendered one item of her faith, bated one jot of her hope, or relinquished one impulse of her charity. She has established new claims upon our attachment by the Catholic, Scriptural, and Protestant basis on which she is erecting her new constitution, and she is challenging our increased respect by the manly and independent spirit in which she is endeavouring to meet her difficulties and wants.

PROTESTANT NON-ESTABLISHED EPISCOPAL CHURCHES.

No. I.

THE PROTESTANT EPISCOPAL CHURCH IN THE UNITED STATES. THE progress which is being made towards the reconstruction of the disestablished Church of Ireland cannot fail to be an object of deep interest, not only to those who are anxious for the welfare of our sister island, but also to all who have at heart the cause of Protestant Christianity. We think it may assist our readers in forming a judgment upon the points which have been discussed and determined by the Church Convention at Dublin, and in distinguishing to what extent the Church of Ireland, in framing her new Constitution, is or is not following existing models, if we present them with a series of sketches of the Constitutions adopted by the leading Protestant Episcopal Churches of Christendom which are in a state of disconnection with the civil power similar to that in which the Church of Ireland has been recently placed.

We propose, then, as the heading of the present article indicates, to consider first the offshoot of our own Church, which took root in our American colonies upon their separation from this country.

The Protestant Episcopal Church in the United States* completed last autumn the eightieth year of her independent existence. Her Constitution, a draft of which had been framed three years previously, and a body of Canons for her government, were formally adopted by a Convention held at Philadelphia in the autumn of 1789. Her episcopate at that time

For full information on the affairs of this Church, we would refer our readers to "A Treatise on the Law of the Protestant Episcopal Church in the United States. By the Rev. Henry Caswall, M.A. London: 1851." "Church Organization: the Constitution of the Church in the United States of America, in Canada, and in

New Zealand, &c. With an Introduction. By the Rev. W. Sherlock, B.A. Dublin: 1870." We especially recommend this last work, as presenting in a cheap and compendious form the Constitutions and Canons of the Churches of which it treats, together with some very intelligent remarks and suggestions with respect to them.