thousand dollars. The case was appealed to the Supreme Court, and Chief Justice Beasley, in delivering the opinion of the Court declared: "The English Ecclesiastical Law, although somewhat modified by new circumstances and by American usages and statutes, constitutes the substantial basis of the law controlling the affairs of this particular Church." In a later case, the Supreme Court of New Jersey decided the same question. The Court held, that "the English Ecclesiastical Law forms the basis of the law regulating the affairs of the Episcopal Church in this country, and is in force, except so far as it has been modified and changed by statute, and by the usages and Canons of the Church."

In a still more recent case, that of Jennings vs. Scarborough, decided in 1894, the Supreme Court of the same State affirmed the decision of the Court in Lynd vs. Menzies.

This case has been cited with approval by the courts of several States, and I know of no case where its decision has even been questioned, and until it is overruled, it must be taken as voicing the opinions of the courts as to the continuing force of the Ecclesiastical Law of the Church of England, now become a part of our Common Law Ecclesiastical, upon the American Church.

I have dwelt at some length upon this branch of our law, because its importance seems to be little recognized, so imperfectly understood, and yet no correct construction of a majority of our rubrics and many of our Canons can be had without reference to the Common Law. We are too apt to take it for granted that a rubric or Canon gives the whole law on the subject, when quite the contrary is the case. We must remember, also, that all rubrics and canons enacted in derogation of the Common Law, that is contrary to the principles of the Common Law, must be

thousand dollars. The case was appealed to the Supreme Court, and Chief Justice Beasley, in delivering the opinion of the Court declared: "The English Ecclesiastical Law, although somewhat modified by new circumstances and by American usages and statutes, constitutes the substantial basis of the law controlling the affairs of this particular Church." In a later case, the Supreme Court of New Jersey decided the same question. The Court held, that "the English Ecclesiastical Law forms the basis of the law regulating the affairs of the Episcopal Church in this country, and is in force, except so far as it has been modified and changed by statute, and by the usages and Canons of the Church."

In a still more recent case, that of Jennings vs. Scarborough, decided in 1894, the Supreme Court of the same State affirmed the decision of the Court in Lynd vs. Menzies.

This case has been cited with approval by the courts of several States, and I know of no case where its decision has even been questioned, and until it is overruled, it must be taken as voicing the opinions of the courts as to the continuing force of the Ecclesiastical Law of the Church of England, now become a part of our Common Law Ecclesiastical, upon the American Church.

I have dwelt at some length upon this branch of our law, because its importance seems to be little recognized, so imperfectly understood, and yet no correct construction of a majority of our rubrics and many of our Canons can be had without reference to the Common Law. We are too apt to take it for granted that a rubric or Canon gives the whole law on the subject, when quite the contrary is the case. We must remember, also, that all rubrics and canons enacted in derogation of the Common Law, that is contrary to the principles of the Common Law, must be

strictly construed, and cannot be extended beyond their plain and expressed meaning. While rubrics and canons enacted in accordance with the Common Law and to state some principle of that law are capable of a much wider range of construction.

Besides the Common Law which we have inherited from our Mother Church of England, there has been and is being developed a Common Law of our own, the offspring of our necessities and position, much in the same manner as the Common Law of England arose in the Saxon age. Some of our Canons and a few of our rubrics are written statements of that Law. To mention one instance. The rubric in the Communion office directing the saying of the Gloria Tibi after the announcement of the Gospel was adopted in the last revision of the Prayer Book, previous to the revision now in progress, because it had become a part of the Common Law of the Church through long and well nigh universal observance. Changes in Canon and rubric will continue to be made, in order to express the desire of the Church as shown in custom and general observance.

Having considered the relation of the Common Law Ecclesiastical to American jurisprudence, let me, in passing, most emphatically deny the assumed parallel between the nation and the Church which very persistent attempts have been made to establish.

The national government derives all its powers by delegation from the several states, or from the people through the states; whereas, the national Church receives none of its powers from the supposed independent dioceses. The consent by the Church in the different states to the national organization, in no way conferred, nor was it an attempt to confer legislative functions upon the national Church. Not a single power is delegated by the Constitu

tion of the General Convention. That instrument assumes that the needed powers exist. Not so with the Constitution of the national government. By the latter all the powers of such government are delegated. In the state, under our form and theory of government, power ascends from the people; whereas, in the Church, it descends from above to the Bishops, and in some respects, through the Bishops, into the subordinate ministry. The Bishops are the governing order. As St. Ignatius says: "Without your Bishop, you should do nothing." And Origen tells us: "The ecclesiastical government over us all is committed to the Bishop." Even John Calvin held that "The Episcopate itself proceeds from God Himself. The Office of Bishop was established by the authority of God, and is regulated by laws." Authorities, ad infinitum, might be cited to show that in the early days of the Church, all power of legislation was possessed by the Bishops, and the determination of all controversies, whatever their nature, devolved upon the Bishops. I state this real authority and governing power of Bishops, because, strange as it may seem, a very considerable portion of even Church people appear to have no idea that Bishops have any other inherent functions than such as pertain to ordination and confirmation, while the fact is, that all judicial and legislative powers are inherent in the office of Bishop. Neither priest nor layman has any inherent power of legislation. In the ancient Church, their counsel and advice were taken by the Bishops; but in our Church, today, the Bishops have granted to them, as represented in General Convention, the constitutional right of initiating and vetoing measures. In other words, the Bishops have consented and in legal form, agreed not to exercise certain of their inherent functions, except so far as advised and approved by the House of Deputies in General Convention. There is not a