sixteen.1 And they are often treated as a tax on houses, communicants, cattle, and other items, according to the user shown to exist.2 The Tithe Commutation Act of 1836 did not apply to Easter offerings, mortuaries, or surplice fees, or to tithe of fish or minerals. But in 1839 power to commute these also was given. These small offerings and oblations had been recoverable only in the spiritual court; but in 1695, when they or the small tithes. amounted to 40s. or less from one person, then they might be recovered before two justices and enforced by distress of goods. And the person summoned before justices could set up as his defence a modus, in which case justices were to forbear judgment and leave the adjudication to other courts. This jurisdiction of justices was found so convenient that the recovery of all tithes and oblations, not exceeding 10., due from one person at one time, was allowed in that way.7 8 Quakers and recovery of tithes.-In 1695 Quakers who refused to pay tithe or church-rates were made liable to distress of goods in a summary way. And this remedy against them by summary process was soon extended to include customary offerings for stipends. And in 1812 1 2 E. & Y. 122, 169. 2 R. v Hall, L. R., 1 Q. B. 632. 3 6 & 7 Will. IV. c. 71, § 90. 4 2 & 3 Vic. c. 62, § 9. 5 7 & 8 Will. III. c. 6; 53 Geo. III. c. 127, § 4; 7 Geo. IV. c. 15. 6 7 & 8 Will. III. c. 6, § 8; R. v Jefferys, 1 B. & C. 604. Besides the oblations and offerings already mentioned, there were certain small fees for services rendered to individual parishioners, such as surplice fees and baptism fees. Baptism fees were in 1872 wholly abolished, except in case of some persons then having right to such fees by statute.-35 & 36 Vic. c. 36. Even in the most ancient times the notion prevailed, that the clergy should not take money for administering the sacraments, nor in the case of baptisin.-Bing. Chr. Ant. b. v. c. 4. The amount of such fees has varied much at different times, and the validity depended on custom. A great step was taken in advance when certain commissioners were authorised to make and fix a table of such fees for each parish, each district and extra-parochial place.-59 Geo. III. c. 134. And the commutation of surplice fees was authorised in the same way as the commutation of tithes.-6 & 7 Will. IV. c. 71, § 90; 2 & 3 Vic. c. 62, § 9. 7 5 & 6 Will. IV. c. 74; 4 & 5 Vic. c. 36. But not more than two years' arrears can be recovered by this remedy.-Robinson v Purday, 16 M. & W. 11. 8 7 & 8 Will. III. c. 34, § 3. 91 Geo. I. st. 2, c. 6, § 2. the amount so recoverable was raised to 50l. It was, however, specially enacted, with respect to Quakers, when tithes or other ecclesiastical demands were sued for in any court, that no process of law should issue to imprison the person but only process of execution against the goods. And while the tithes of others to the amount of 10l. were recoverable before justices, the tithes of Quakers amounting to 50%. were so recoverable also.3 Moreover, a further peculiarity attends the recovery of tithe from them, which is this, that the goods of the Quaker, wherever situated, may be taken and sold without the necessity of first impounding them.1 Collecting alms in church.-While tithes and Easter offerings formed the fund for maintaining the clergy, the ancient custom of offerings may also be here noticed, though these were used for charitable objects entirely. To give oblations at the altar was one of the earliest customs of the Church, and made up what was called by Tertullian a bank of piety, to help the aged, the prisoners and captives. It was deemed a privilege, and those who gave them sometimes had their names rehearsed; but that in turn was found to lead to ostentation. And it was said the oblations of thieves and harlots were rejected. As the Church from the earliest times made it part of its business to attend to the poor, it was natural that offerings of the faithful should be received and applied to such a purpose. The canons and rubrics of the Church still recognise this practice, for they direct, that after divine service is ended the money given at the offertory shall be disposed of to such pious and charitable uses as the minister and churchwardens shall think fit, wherein if they disagree it shall be disposed of as the ordinary shall appoint. But when the same agency was extended to collections for charities of a more miscellaneous kind, the legislature, in the time of Queen Anne, thought fit to intervene, as if the collection of money in this way was a species of interference with the prerogative. And it is only in modern times that it is confessed 1 53 Geo. III. c. 127, § 6. 5 Tertull. Apol. c. 39. 6 . 2 5 & 6 Will. IV. c. 74, § 2. 4 6 & 7 Will. IV. c. 71, § 84. Bing. Chr. Ant. b. xv. c. 2. 7 In 1705 a statute passed authorising briefs or letters patent to collect charity money, and the churchwardens were to keep a to be superfluous for the law to interfere with the discretion. of incumbents as to these voluntary subscriptions and donations for all honest undertakings connected with ecclesiastical affairs. record, and the money was to be accounted for to a master in chancery, and those collecting money otherwise were liable to a penalty.-4 Anne, c. 25. This act was only repealed in 1828 when the Church Building Society was founded.-9 Geo. IV. c. 42. In one case in 1719 a clergyman was indicted for being seditiously disposed to the Government, and conspiring with divers boys and girls to wander up and down Kent to collect money, and, under the pretence of collecting charities, inciting the parishioners to give alms and gifts. And the judge told the jury, that a parish priest had no right to have collections in his church for poor children, even with the bishop's leave, as the gathering of money was an invasion of the prerogative; also of the function of the legislature; that the levying of money was the tenderest part of our constitution, for it was making the nation pay double taxes. The clergyman and churchwardens were found guilty and fined six shillings and eightpence each.-Hindley's Case, 15 St. Tr. 1407-18. On that occasion some London charity children were taken down to Chislehurst, and the worst that the clergyman and churchwardens there did was to make a collection to assist them. CHAPTER VII. THE DUTIES, DISABILITIES, EXEMPTIONS, AND PRIVILEGES OF THE CLERGY. Duties of clergy towards the public.-The original theory on which a parish church was founded and endowed and maintained by a tax on the whole of the parishioners, more general and searching even than a poor-rate, was, that the priest was established for the benefit of all. And as will be seen, all were for centuries bound under penalties to attend the church and receive the benefit so intended. And though in modern times it has been found impracticable to enforce this attendance, even against the churchmen themselves, because many of the parishioners have discovered that they can obtain services of a like kind more to their mind in another manner, yet some of the original theories and maxims relating to the duties of the priest survive to this day, and, being part of the statutory law, have never been repealed. One of these duties is to administer the sacrament to all parishioners who wish it, except under the conditions mentioned, and these are somewhat difficult to define. In one case in 1660, when a clergyman refused to administer the communion to a parishioner, he brought an action at law, and the court seemed to think such an action might be brought, if due notice had been given and no just excuse could be set up for refusing to gratify the applicant. The 30th Article moreover may be said expressly to recognise this absolute duty not to deny the Cup of the Lord to the lay people. And the statute of Edward VI., still in force, says, that the minister shall not without a lawful cause 1 1 Sid. 34. 1 deny the same to any person that will devoutly and humbly desire it. At the same time a rule enjoined by the rubric is, that the communion shall not be administered unless there are four, or three persons at the least, to communicate with the priest, or at all events reasonably expected to be ready and willing to join. This duty of the clergy it is true was limited by the canons and rubric to such only as have been previously confirmed, or to persons in danger, or to cases of necessity. And in particular there is no obligation to admit a notorious evil liver, or one who lives openly in sin notorious, or one who has done any wrong to his neighbour by word or deed, or those between whom malice and hatred are perceived to reign, or those who are common and notorious depravers of the Book of Common Prayer, or those who have spoken against her Majesty's sovereign authority in causes ecclesiastical, or those who will not bend, or those who refuse to be present at public prayers, or those who are adulterers, incestuous, or drunken. But in one case of refusal, it was held to be unlawful to refuse the communion to a person as an evil liver, because he had published extracts from the liturgy. Another duty relates to the burial of the dead, the law relating to which has been already set forth in that division of the subject entitled the" Security of the Person." 5 Another duty of the parish priest was to administer the rite of baptism. An option is given to the minister to perform it either publicly or privately and for the public service a font of stone is required in every church. And no minister is at liberty. to refuse after due notice to administer this rite to all parishioners without distinction of creed, otherwise he is liable to be suspended by the bishop. Another duty of the parish clergyman also is to marry persons. As marriage 1 1 Ed. VI. c. 1, § 8. 2 Parnell v Roughton, L. R., 6 Priv. C. 46; Clifton v Ridsdale, 1 Prob. Div. 349. 3 Can. 1603. 4 Jenkins v Cook, 1 Prob. Div. 80. If any person administer the sacrament who is not an ordained priest, according to the form in the Book of Common Prayer, he incurs a penalty of 1007.—14 Ch. II. c. 4, § 10. 5 2 Pat. Com. (Pers.) 434. 6 Can. 1603, § 81. 7 Ibid. § 68. It was recognised early in the Church as the duty of the priest to administer baptism to all who required it.-Egbright's Exc. A.D. 740. |