Venezuela was the scene of internecine dissensions, though of comparatively little moment, the disturbance having occurred in States far distant from the capital and preserved a purely local character. Guzman Blanco, having resumed his position as Dictator, proposed some notable measures of reform; among others, a new territorial division, reducing the number of States to seven, in order to "limit the central and extend the Federal power of the republic."

The year was marked by more or less agitation in some of the States of Colombia; but the triumph of the Independent party lulled the revolutionary spirit, and was hailed as an earnest of the early return to permanent peace, it being confidently believed that a large proportion of the influential men of all parties would rally round the government of the President-elect, and second his efforts toward the regeneration of the country.

The progress of time can scarcely be said to have improved the condition of affairs in Ecuador. Political arrests and growing discontent of the people with the Government were the almost exclusive burden of such reports as found an echo outside the limits of that distracted country.

A disputed question of boundaries between Chili and Bolivia led to the declaration by the former against the latter of a war, in which Peru, the friend and ally of Bolivia, was afterward involved, and which has proved one of the most disastrous in the annals of South America since the period of independence.

Peace in the remaining countries of the Southern Continent has continued undisturbed, and the efforts of the governments, as well as those of the people, were directed to the development of the various elements of national prosperity.

AMES, EDWARD R., preacher and bishop, was born at Ames township, Ohio, on May 20, 1806, and died at Baltimore, Maryland, on April 25th. His early education was plain and practical. A natural taste for reading was fostered by a local library to which he had access, and when twenty years of age he entered the Ohio University at Athens. There he remained many years, and supported himself mainly by teaching. In 1828 the Ohio Conference of the M. E. Church was in session at Chillicothe, and he attended its meetings. Bishop Roberts, the presiding officer, was so impressed with the young man's ability that he invited him to accompany him to the Illinois Conference, at Madison, Illinois. When there he made the acquaintance of several prominent Methodist clergymen, and opened a school at Lebanon, Illinois, which was the germ of McKendree College. In August, 1830, he entered the itinerant ministry, and was licensed to preach by the Rev. Peter Cartwright. He was sent to the Shoal Creek circuit, which covered an almost unlimited territory, and when the Indiana Conference was organized

in 1832, he, then a young man, went with the new Conference, and was ordained a deacon by Bishop Soule. In 1834 he was ordained an elder by Bishop Roberts, and was employed in several fields of labor, including two years spent in St. Louis, Missouri, until 1840. In that year he was appointed a delegate to the General Conference, held in Baltimore, and that body elected him Corresponding Secretary of the Missionary Society for the South and West. In this office he had the supervision of the Methodist German and Indian missions, and traveled upward of twenty-five thousand miles. He was the first chaplain ever elected by an Indian council, having served the Choctaw General Council in that capacity in 1842. From 1844 to 1852 he traveled as presiding elder on the New Albany, Indianapolis, and Jeffersonville districts of the Indiana Conference. In 1844 the State University of Indiana conferred on him the degree of A. M., and in 1848 he was elected President of the Asbury University, Indiana, but declined the honor. At the General Conference of 1852 he was elected Bishop together with Bishops Scott and Simpson; and he was the first Methodist Bishop who ever visited the Pacific coast. When the question of the separation of the Methodists came up in 1844, he opposed the division, and afterward did all he could to foster a fraternal spirit. When the ecclesiastical property of the M. E. Church South was confiscated for the time being, he was commissioned by President Lincoln and Secretary Stanton to take charge of it. This was a most delicate duty, and in its performance he visited New Orleans and other Southern cities, organizing societies and appointing white and colored preachers. During the twenty-seven years in which Bishop Ames was in the episcopacy his whole public life was marked by a strict adherence to the rules and discipline of Methodism; and even when the most difficult points came up for settlement he displayed a far-seeing judgment and quickness of comprehension which enabled him to grapple successfully with them. He had a happy facility for selecting the right men, and their conduct in the fields to which they were appointed showed the correctness of his judgment. Although grave and dignified in manner, there was a magnetism about him which attracted, and his preaching was always thoroughly enjoyed. He could scarcely be styled an orator, and yet his quiet reasoning, apt aphorisms, pertinent illustrations, and earnestness, impressed more than mere declamation. After a protracted illness from diabetes and pulmonary troubles he gradually sank until released by death. He was married twice, and left a son and two daughters.

ANGLICAN CHURCHES. In 1879 the Church of England contained in England and Wales two ecclesiastical provinces, Canterbury and York. The province of Canterbury comprises the Archbishop of Canterbury and the Bishops of London, Winchester, Oxford, St.

David's, Llandaff, Norwich, Bangor, Worcester, Gloucester and Bristol, Ely, Rochester, Lichfield, Hereford, Peterborough, Lincoln, Salisbury, Bath and Wells, Exeter, Truro (established in 1877), Chichester, St. Albans (established in 1877), and St. Asaph. The province of York comprises the Archbishop of York and the Bishops of Durham, Ripon, Chester, Carlisle, Manchester, and Sodor and Man. The Church of Ireland has the two provinces of Armagh and Dublin, each containing one archbishop and five bishops. The Episcopal Church of Scotland has seven bishops, the Bishop of Moray, Ross, and Caithness being the "Primus. "In the British colonies and in missionary territories the Church of England had in 1879 also the following dioceses: 1. In Europe -Gibraltar; 2. In India-Calcutta, Lahore, Rangoon, Madras, Bombay, Labuan, and Colombo, the Bishop of Calcutta bearing the title of Metropolitan in India and Ceylon; 3. In the West Indies Kingston (Jamaica), Barbadoes, Guiana, Antigua, Nassau, and Trinidad; 4. In China-Victoria and North China; 5. In Africa-Capetown, Graham's Town, Maritzburg, Sierra Leone, St. Helena, St. John's (late Independent Caffraria), Zoolooland, Bloemfontein (Orange Free State), Pretoria, Mauritius, Madagascar, Central Africa, and Niger (mission), the Bishop of Capetown having the title of Metropolitan; 6. In Australasia-Sydney, Melbourne, Ballarat, Adelaide, Newcastle, Bathurst, North Queensland (established in 1878), Grafton and Armidale, Perth, Brisbane, Goulburn, Tasmania, Christ Church (New Zealand), Auckland, Nelson, Wellington, Waiapu, and Dunedin (Otago), the Bishop of Sydney having the title of Metropolitan of Australia, and the Bishop of Christ Church the title of Primus of New Zealand; 7. In North America -Toronto, Newfoundland, Rupert's Land, Saskatchevan, Athabasca, Moosonee, Montreal, Fredericton, Nova Scotia (the first colonial see, founded in 1787), Huron, Columbia, Quebec, Ontario, Algoma, and Niagara; 8. Others -Falkland Islands, Honolulu, Melanesia, and Jerusalem.

The population connected with the Anglican Churches of the British Isles is estimated as follows by E. G. Ravenstein:

In British North America, the Anglican Church had according to the census of 1871 a population of 494,049 in the provinces of Ontario, Quebec, Nova Scotia, and New Brunswick, 7,220 in Prince Edward Island, and 55,184 in Newfoundland. Including the districts of British Columbia, Manitoba, and Northwest Territories, the aggregate population connected with the Church of England amounted in 1871 to about 580,000.

The Convocation of Canterbury met February 18th. A petition was presented in the Upper House praying the House to take into consideration the repeated applications of the Patriarch, Bishops, and clergy of the descendants and representatives of the Church of Persia and the farther East, whose Catholicos had been recognized at the Council of Nice as ranking next after the three great Patriarchs of the Church. The Archbishop of Canterbury gave some information as to the result of inquiries which had been made into the condition of these people, who constitute the community commonly called the Nestorians. The petition was referred to a committee, who were instructed to consider it and report upon it at the next group of sessions of the Convocation. A committee was appointed to inquire into the sale of next presentations and advowsons. A discussion took place on the character and status of the Reformed Episcopal Church, in the course of which the Archbishop stated that he had received a communication from a person representing himself to be one of the ministers of that body, asking whether he might officiate in any of the churches of his lordship's or any other diocese. To this the Archbishop had replied that as a clergyman of the Reformed Episcopal Church the inquirer was not entitled to officiate in any church of the dioceses of the province; and if he did, the law had provided for the taking of legal proceedings against him for the penalties prescribed in the Act of Parliament. It appeared, from statements made during the discussion, that the Colonial Church Act requires the consent of the bishop to the performance of any service by a person other than a clergyman ordained by a bishop of the Church of England; and that, when an unqualified person is allowed to officiate in the parish church, the incumbent is liable to severe penalties. In the Lower House, a petition was presented from the English Church Union, asking that steps be taken to protect the churches from the desecrations to which they are liable by the celebration therein of the (so-called) marriages of divorced persons whose real husbands or wives are still living. A gravamen was presented which embodied the representations of fellows and other members of the University of Cambridge against the continued use of the so-called damnatory clauses of the Athanasian Creed, and asking for their removal from the Liturgy. It was taken to the Upper House. A report was presented from the Committee on the Sale of Advowsons

and Augmentation of Small Livings, containing a scheme for the sale of small advowsons, the patronage of which is vested in public bodies. After discussion, it was referred back. A resolution was adopted expressing the desire of the House that liberty should be given to the deans and chapters of the cathedrals of the new foundation to revise from time to time their statutes, with the consent of competent authority.

The Convocation met again for the dispatch of business on June 24th. Several days were spent in consideration of the revision of rubrics in respect to ornaments, the Athanasian Creed, and the burial service. A synodical declaration was decided upon to be appended to the Athanasian Creed," for the removal of doubts and to prevent disquietude," which states that the creed "doth not make any addition to the faith as contained in Holy Scripture." A recommendation was adopted to the effect that in the burial service it shall be allowable, under certain circumstances, to read portions of Scripture and prayers from the Prayer-Book not at present included in the service. The following new rubric was agreed upon, to be placed immediately after the "ornaments rubric": "In saying public prayers and administering the sacraments and other rites of the Church, every priest shall wear a surplice with the stole or scarf and the hood of his degree; or, if he thinks fit, the gown, with hood or scarf; and no other vestments shall at any other time be used by him contrary to the monition of the Bishop of the diocese; provided always, that the rubric shall not be understood to repeal the 24th, 25th, and 58th canons of 1604." The schedule of proposed alterations of the rubrics in the Prayer-Book having been completed, a report of the business of revision in which the Convocation had been engaged for several years was ordered to be presented to her Majesty, with an address, in which it was submitted that in approving the accompanying alterations and recommendations, the Houses did not wish to be understood as inviting the sanction of the two Houses of Parliament to what was proposed until the draft bill presented with the report should have become a law.

The Convocation of York, at its session in July, declined to take any action on the ornaments rubric, every effort in that direction being defeated by the disagreement of the two houses. A similar result was reached in the propositions which were made to modify the use of the Athanasian Creed. A resolution was offered to the effect that no action of Convocation ought to diminish the frequency of the use of this creed. The Bishop of Durham offered an amendment proposing to change the rubric so as to make the use of the creed optional. Both motions were lost by disagreement. A motion favoring variations in the burial service, similar to those approved in the Convocation of Canterbury, was lost in both

houses. A resolution was passed unanimously, to the effect "that in the opinion of the Convocation it is inexpedient that any legislative sanction be sought for proposed amendments of the rubrics until the Bill to provide Facilities,' etc., agreed to by the Convocation of Canterbury July 4, 1879, which was previously in substance agreed to by the Lower House of Convocation of York 19th February, 1879, or some similar measure, had become law."

The Archbishop of Canterbury waited on the Home Secretary August 15th, and placed in his hands the report which had been agreed upon by both houses of the Convocation of Canterbury in answer to her Majesty's letter of business, on the subject of the rubrics of the Book of Common Prayer. The report embodies a bill "to provide facilities for the amendment from time to time of the rites and ceremonies of the Church of England." In principle the bill recognizes that regulations respecting rites and ceremonies require to be revised from time to time, and that, as times, manners, and modes of thought change, old rules and customs must be changed to correspond. It recognizes, too, that in such changes the Church ought to take the initiative, and that the mouthpiece of the Church should be the archbishops and bishops of both provinces and the clergy by representation in the two Convocations. It recognizes, further, the necessity of the assent of the laity through Parliament to any alterations or additions to the Prayer-Book so initiated. The bill consists of eleven clauses, of which three are either explanatory or directive. The remaining eight provide that the archbishops, bishops, and clergy in both Houses of Convocation may prepare from time to time and lay before her Majesty in Council a scheme for making desirable alterations in the Prayer-Book. Any scheme so prepared is to be laid before both Houses of Parliament within twenty-one days of their meeting. Within forty days either House may address the Queen asking her Majesty to withhold her royal consent. If neither House present such address, her Majesty may make an order ratifying the scheme and specifying when it shall take effect.

A memorial from graduates of the universities and persons learned in history and archæology was prepared and addressed to the Home Secretary, asking him to advise her Majesty to take no further judicial action on the ritual reports of the Privy Council until certain historical misstatements, misquotations from, and interpolations in, important documents shall have been examined by learned men appointed by her Majesty for the purpose. Some of the misstatements are specified, such as the assertion that 1549 was the second year of Edward VI.; that the consecration prayer was omitted in 1552; that mixing wine and water apart from the service was unknown to East and West; that there are such documents in existence as the advertisements of

66

1564; the interpolation of the word "only in the copies quoted in the reports; the assertion that surplice and alb were not worn concurrently" according to any known use; the assertion that Bishop Cosin held a visitation in 1687, fifteen years after his death, etc. Decisions based on such statements, they will urge, only bring the law into contempt.

The General Conference of Anglican Bishops which met at Lambeth in July, 1878, appointed a committee "to consider the relations between the Old Catholics and others who have separated themselves from the Roman Communion. To this committee the Archbishop of Canterbury referred a petition which he had received from the dissident French ecclesiastic M. Loyson, praying for official recognition of the Old Catholics by the Anglican Episcopate. Bishop Eden, Primus of Scotland, as chairman of this committee, in the latter part of 1878, addressed a letter to M. Loyson, saying that, in conjunction with the Bishop of Edinburgh, he would so far recognize his mission as to give it a provisional oversight. Under ordinary circumstances, he said, the English Episcopate must have declined the request; but the times were not ordinary, and the conduct of the Church of Rome in issuing the recent Vatican decrees seemed to the bishops to justify a departure from their customary usage, and to authorize them to recognize a principle of yet higher obligation than that of church order. It would be impossible, however, for the bishops to pledge themselves to the administration of episcopal functions in the mission until they had become acquainted with the proposed ritual and order of the Church; and they could then do so only in the event of the ritual "in its language and ceremonies containing nothing inconsistent with the Word of God, with the principles enunciated in our formularies, with the prerogatives of the One Divine head of the Church, or with the One Mediator between God and man, the Man Christ Jesus." (See OLD CATHOLICS.)

The case of the appeals of Lord Penzance, Dean of Arches, and of Mr. James Martin, the promoter of the suit of Martin vs. Mackonochie, against a judgment of the Lord Chief Justice making absolute a rule obtained on behalf of the Rev. Alexander H. Mackonochie, restraining all further proceedings in the suit, came before the High Court of Appeal in March. The proceedings against Mr. Mackonochie in the Court of Arches had lasted for four years, when in June, 1878, he was sentenced by Lord Penzance to three years' suspension from his benefice. A rule was obtained in the Queen's Bench for a prohibition, based on the ground that the monition which had been inflicted upon the appellant previous to his suspension was a sentence covering all the penalty awarded, and ended the case; that any further penalty must result from a new trial, and the sentence of suspension to which

the Court appealed against had proceeded could not be imposed without such new trial. In August, 1878, the prohibition was made absolute. The Solicitor-General, who appeared for Lord Penzance, in advocating the appeal, argued that the common-law courts had no authority over the ecclesiastical courts, supporting his position by citations from old writers on the subject when the authority of the spiritual courts was admittedly independent. The case was decided, June 28th, in favor of the appellants, three of the judges giving opinions in favor of reversing, two of sustaining the decision of the Court of Queen's Bench, Lord Chief Justice Coleridge, in giving his judgment, reviewed all the circumstances of the case, and expounded the ecclesiastical laws and usages by which such cases as that before the Court were governed. He held that, both on the ground of reason and on the authorities he had looked into, such a monition as the one in question was perfectly allowable in a Court Christian, and that disobedience to such a monition might subject the offender to some form of punishment. It seemed to him that in this case suspension was warranted by the law and the practices of the ecclesiastical courts. The steps taken in this case were, to his mind, right; but, if he thought they were wrong, his conclusions as to the law and usage would be the same. He could not see the hardship of an officer of the Church being obliged to obey the law of his society, after the law had been declared to him by the highest authority in the country. He thought that Lord Penzance had not done more than he was called upon to do, and no more than what the practice of his Court justified, and he thought that that practice was not contrary to the Church Discipline Act. On the 15th of November Lord Penzance, in the Court of Arches, ordered the enforcement of the writ of prohibition which he had issued against Mr. Mackonochie in June, 1878, the operation of which had been suspended during the pendency of the appeals on the case. The writ involved a suspension of the ecclesiastical functions of Mr. Mackonochie for three years, beginning with the 23d of November. While granting it, Lord Penzance said that he would be willing to hear any application for a relaxation of sentence founded on a promise to obey the law. The Council of the Church Union determined on a policy of resistance to the judgment.

A prosecution was instituted against the Bishop of Oxford in January, requiring him to show cause why he should not institute proceedings of inquiry into charges which had been made under the Church Discipline Act against the Rev. Thomas T. Carter, rector of the parish of Clemer, for adopting ritualistic practices in worship. The Bishop appeared in person, February 27th, in the Court of Queen's Bench, and pleaded that the Church Discipline Act could not intend that he should be deprived of his right of discretion to grant or refuse a

commission; and that, if this right were taken away, grave injury would result to the Church from power being given to foolish, frivolous, or vindictive persons to set the law in motion. The Court decided, March 8th, that a mandamus should be issued directing the Bishop to issue a commission of inquiry. The Lord Chief Justice, in giving the judgment of the Court, said that two questions were raised by the proceedings: first, whether the language of the Church Discipline Act imposed a duty on the Bishop which he was bound to fulfill, or merely gave him a discretionary power which he might exercise or not at his option; and, secondly, whether the Church Discipline Act had been superseded by the Public Worship Regulation Act of 1874. In regard to the meaning of the Church Discipline Act, it was a settled canon of construction that, where an act authorized the doing of a thing for the sake of justice and for the public good, the words "it shall be lawful" were to be read in a compulsory sense. The statute in question was passed with the view of enforcing the rights of parishioners to have the service of the parish church performed according to law, and the power given to the Bishop to issue a commission to inquire into the matter was certainly one to be exercised for the sake of justice and the public good. The statute had reference to the administration of justice in ecclesiastical offenses; and the maintenance of the doctrines and ritual of the established religion, for the uniformity of which so many acts have been passed, could not be other than a matter of national interest and concern. Moreover, it was the undoubted right of every inhabitant of every parish in the kingdom, who desired to frequent the parish church, to have the services performed according to the ritual established by law, without having his religious sense shocked and outraged by the introduction of innovations not sanctioned by law nor consistent with usage, and which appeared to him inconsistent with the simplicity of worship of the Church of England. Reading the whole of the act together, and looking at the state of the law previous to its being passed, their lordships were of the opinion that the act imposed a duty upon the Bishop which he might be compelled to exercise. Their lordships were further of opinion that the Church Discipline Act was still in force, and had not been superseded by the later act. The Bishop appealed against this decision to the Supreme Court of Appeal, which decided, May 30th, in his favor, reversing the decision of the Court of Queen's Bench. The decision was given by Lord Justice Bramwell, who held that prima facie the words "it shall be lawful," in the third section of the Church Discipline Act, constituted a discretion. In the present case, he thought, the discretion had been erroneously exercised.

The eightieth anniversary meeting of the Church Missionary Society was held in Lon

VOL. XIX.-3 A

don, May 5th. The total available income of the Society for the year had been £187,235, and the total expenditure had been £204,186. The total deficit for the last two years, which had to be taken from the Society's working capital, was £24,757. The sum of £35,000 had been deposited with the Society in trust for the development of an evangelistic native agency in connection with the native churches in India, and £10,601 had been given for other special objects, making the whole amount intrusted to the Society during the year £232,836. Fifteen qualified laborers had been accepted for the work of the Society, and fourteen others had been accepted as suitable to be trained in the missionary college.

The Board of the Society for the Propagation of the Gospel in November, 1878, adopted a resolution altering the rule respecting the examination of candidates, so that candidates selected by a colonial bishop or his commissioner need not be required to pass the Board of Examiners. The resolution was regarded as being in the interest of ritualism, since the immediate occasion of its being offered had been the rejection of a candidate by the Board of Examiners on the ground, as was alleged, of his being a member of the Society of the Holy Cross; and dissatisfaction was excited among officers and members of the Society by its passage. The Bishops of Gloucester and Bristol and of Peterborough declared that they would resign their offices as Vice-Presidents of the Society if it were not rescinded; and animated discussions were had over it at the meetings of the Board. At a meeting of the Society held February 2, 1879, the resolution in question was rescinded, and a committee was appointed to consider the by-laws bearing upon the subject and all matters affecting their working.

The annual meeting of the Society for the Propagation of the Gospel in Foreign Parts was held in London, April 29th. The Archbishop of Canterbury presided. The receipts of the Society had been £145,223, or about £3,000 less than the receipts of the previous year. There had been employed during the year, in various fields of labor, 567 missionaries, as follows: In Asia, 135; in Africa, 121; in Australia and the Pacific, 61; in America and the West Indies, 248; in Europe, 2. The force of the Society also included about 1,200 catechists and lay teachers, mostly natives in heathen countries, and about 250 students in colleges abroad.

The Rev. Dr. Baring, Bishop of Durham, having resigned his office in consequence of illness, an address was sent him by 531 of the clergy of the diocese, in which it was stated that during his eighteen years' administration of the diocese 119 new churches and 188 parochial schools had been erected, 130 churches and chapels of ease restored, 102 new parishes formed and endowed, and 186 added to the number of the parochial clergy. The Rev.