The gentleman, whose portrait appears above, is widely and favorably known as a successful merchant and proprietor of valuable slate quarries in the vicinity of Fairhaven, where he is highly respected by the community. Mr. Lloyd was bora December 13, 1833, at Festiniog, North Wales, and came to this country with his father, Edward Lloyd, in 1852, and settled near Fairhaven, Vt., where, a few years aftewards he commenced business for himself in general merchandise. Through perseverance, enterprise and integrity, his business in

creased and flourished, and was carried on successfully until a few years ago, when Mr. Lloyd sold out to Mr. J. D. Culver, in order to have more time to devote to his growing and extensive slate business.

Associated with his brother, Mr. William Lloyd, Mr. Ellis and the late Mr. Owen Owens, who was one of the earliest settlers in the district, and one of the most highly esteemed in the community, Mr. Lloyd, for many years, had been interested in several slate quarries in the vicinity. For several years, however, he has been sole

proprietor of valuable quarries_which have proved very successful. He employs about fifty men, and his slate are sent to all parts of the United States.

Having lost his beloved wife a few years ago, Mr. Lloyd's family consists of four children-three sons and one daughter who has charge of the household, and who is an estimable lady and happily married to Mr. John G. Williams. Mr. Lloyd and his family reside in their pleasant home at Fair Haven.

Mr. Lloyd has one brother, Mr. William E. Lloyd, who is also successfully engaged in the slate business, also two sisters, Mrs. John D. Owens, Fair Haven, and Mrs. Owen Evans, California.

Mr. Lloyd is an active and faithful member in the Welsh Presbyterian church, and is highly esteemed in the coummunity for his Christian character, his genial sociability, and his readiness to aid in all movements tending to advance the interests of his fellowmen. His many friends wish him continued success and a long life of usefulness and happiness.

THE EARLY HISTORY OF THE WELSH CHURCH.

BY MR. WILLIS BUND.

(Concluded from July Number.) One of the points of difference between the Latin and Celtic Churches was that the Latin Church did not recognise the validity of Celtic Orders. This is hardly to be wondered at, having regard to the very different position a Bishop occupied in the two Churches. In the Latin Church the Bishop was the successor of the Apostles, the inheritor of their powers and privileges; in the other the Bishop was for a long time a mere monasqic official, subject to the rule of a man whose title consisted in that he

was in theory or in fact, the descendant of some traditional worthy. In the Celtic Church the official was the abbot, the Bishop was a personal distinction; while in the Latin Church these positions were exactly reversed. This distinction should not be forgotten. When we read of the Bishops of St. David's Llandaff, and Llanbadarn, we must not regard them as Bishops with dioceses, with the authority we are accustomed to ascribe to bishops, but merely as officials of those monasteries. When once this view is accepted one of the great difficulties of Early Welsh Church History, the boundaries of the old Dioceses vanishes, as the Dioceses did not exist.

It is a curious fact that we have no reliable record of the consecration as Bisohp of any of the Great Celtic Sints. It is also curious that of the Welsh Saints that are recorded as Bishops, most of them are Bishops, not of Welsh, but of Continental Sees. It may well be that the Latin Church historian not recognizing Celtic orders represented the Saints as re-consecrated by Latin Bishops not only to show their orthodoxy and to ensure the Apostolic Succession, but al so to assert the Latin Jurisdiction. These or similar reasons have in all probability led to the tricks that have been played with the life of Dubricus. If the Welsh Celtic Bishops ever had any Apostolic Succession it must have been through Dubricus, but it is most doubtful if he has ever been consecrated according to the form of the Latin Church; if he has not there is no connecting link between the Celtic . and Latin Bishops, and the independence of the Celtic Church must be admitted- To avoid this the Latin biographers of Dubricus extend his life far beyond the term of threescore years and ten, and connected him with Germanus so as to make the Latin supremacy quite clear. That the Latin

Church did not recognize Celtic orders is seen from the case of St. Chad, who, after having been a Ceitic bishop for someyears, on being appointed Bishop of Litchfield in 669, was reconsecrated by Archbishop Thomas.

A passage in the beginning of Hywell Dda's Laws mentions the Archbiships of St. David's and Bangor. Much time and learning have been spent over the question of the Welsh Archbishoprics, but an Archbishop was an officer who had no place in the Celtic ecclesiastical system. The idea is opposed both to all tribal organization and to a monastic church. There are several subjects, Mr. Bund observed, connected with the organization of the early Welsh Church that are very interesting, but they involved an infraction of the Society's rules as touched on the domain of current politics, Two matters, however, could be mentioned which would repay careful investigation. The first was the question of the version of the Bible used in the Celtic Church. It was, as might be expected, a Latin version. It is more than doubtful if a Welsh version of the Bible of a very early date ever existed; every inference shows that it did not. But the Celtic Church posessed its own version, one that differed both from the Vulgate, and from any of the ante-Vulgate we are acquainted with. St Jerome's translation (405) did not make its way in Wales as the Celtic church possessed its own version, which held its own long after that date. All our knowledge of this Celtic version is at present derived from the quotations from it that appear in certain writers who wrote from 420 to 909. The version has a double value. It enables a very correct opinion to be formed of the genuineness or otherwise of Welsh MSS. or documents. If the version of Scriptures from which the quotation is made is not the Vulgate, there is a

227

presumption in favour of their genuiness; if the Vulgate version alone is used the authencity of the document is open to grave doubt. If any version of Scripture should be found corresponding with the Celtic, it would go to prove either that such version was the original Celtic or that the Celtic version was well known to the scribe. M. Bund instanced the Codex San Galensts, whose variations from the Vulgate, a recent writer suggests are of an African origin. On such a point he observed, the only opinion of any value is that of competent critics. But it is worthy of question he added, whether we are to admit that the ancient version of the Bible in the most Celtic of Celtic monasteries (St. Gall) is really an African one. Whether the variations from the Vulgate in the Codex San Gallensis correspond in any way with fragments of the Celtic version we have he was unable to say. Should they do so, the MS. will be a valuable source for obtaining further fragments of the Celtic version.

Should the variations turn out to be really Africanisms a new and important question as to the early Celtic Church arises. But putting this MS. aside a most interesting field of research is open to all Welsh scholars who will give up time and trouble to the examination of the early Latin versions of the Bible and of early ecclesiastical writers as to regain for us, as far as possible, the text of the Latin version of the Scriptures used in the Celtic Church, the ancient British Bible. The other line of study in which research into early history of the Welsh Church will probably throw light, is that of the habits and customs of the early inhabitants of these Islands. Much has been done of late years by Rhys and others, but still our knowledge is most defective. We know next to nothing of Celtic heathendom. From the way the con

We do not propose to touch on the productions of his "Awen;" they speak for themselves, but will quote Lewis Morris, who says, "Goronwy Owen was the greatest genius of this age or that ever appeared in our country. In personal appearance he was of medium height, slender, lithesome, with dark hair and complexion.

His eye however, was his most remarkable feature, and under the influence of emotion its dark hue would burst into light and fire."

We might add that the above description of the bard would be applicable to most of his descendants, even to the present generation. By his first wife he had two children, Robert and Goronwy, who attained adolescence but died unmarried. By his second wife, widow Clayton, no issue. By his third wife, Joanna Simmons of Virginia, he had two children, John and Richard B. Owen. John Owen married and emigrated to North Carolina; of him we have no record.

Richard B. Owen, his youngest son, was born in Brunswick County, Virginia, 1767, and educated at William and Mary College. He was a merchant hy occupation, and finally removed to Claiborne, Ala., where he died in 1825. He married Susan Edwards of Virginia, in 1789, and the issue of this marriage, all of whom were born in Brunswick County, Va., were, (1) William E., (2) George W., (3) Goronwy, (4) Richard B., (5) Franklin Lewis, (6) John H., (7) Robert Beverly, (8) Jane Gray.

William E. Owen, the grandson of the bard, was born in 1790, and later removed to Nashville, Tenn., where he resided till the period of his death, 1869. He served in the Mexican war and at its close wore the stars of a colonel. Col. Owen first married Martha Hoover, and the issue of this marriage was William E., John and Philip Goronwy He was united in

229

marriage the second time to Phereby, daughter of Judge Robert Whyte of Nashville, and had one child, Whyte Glendower Owen.

Wm. E. Owen, Jr., born in 1840, was reared and educated at Nashville. At the breaking ont of the Civil War he at once enlisted in the Confederate ranks, and six months later sealed his devotion to the cause with his blood. "His soldier grave will well attest Unto the passer-by,

That dulce et decorum est,

Pro patria mori."

John H. Owen, born in 1850, was reared and educated in Nashville. He was a lawyer by profession, and practised until his death in 1891. He left several daughters.

Philip Goronwy Owen, born in 1854, died young.

Whyte Glendower Owen, M. D., born in 1858, was reared in Louisiana, and graduated at Centenary College of that State in 1876, with the degree of A. M. Studied medicine; was entered at the Charity Hospital of New Orleans, and received the Doctorate from Tulane University of Louisiana in 1880. Since that date has resided. near White Castle, La., where he has been engaged continuously in the practice of his profession. Dr. Owen was married in 1883 to Jennie, daughter of Col. James S. Tuttle, a prominent sugar planter of Iberville, and has two children, James Tuttle Owen, born 1887, Glendower Owen, born 1890.

George W. Owen, second grandson of the bard, born in Brunswick Co., Va., 1798, was a lawyer by profession, and settled in Mobile, Ala., where he figured conspicuously in the political arena for many years. Among other offices occupied by him was a seat in congress, which he held for several consecutive terms. He married Louisa Hollinger and left one son and nine