let the dignity of Arch-Patron be solemnly bestowed upon Lord John Russell, and as the modest olive crowned the Olympian victor, and still humbler parsley the champion of the Isthmus-so let a coronal honourable yet unostentatious as these be prepared for our own great man-a chaplet of native foliage, simple but precious, and such that its medicinal virtue shall counteract the over sweetness of his nature, a coronal of the leaves of Durham Mustard!

CHAPTERS ON PAINTED GLASS.

III. ILLUMINATED WINDOWS.

OUR readers will remember that in some remarks which we made last year upon what we then thought, and still think, too trenchant a condemnation of fresco painting, as a method of church decoration, by Mr. Pugin, in that clever pamphlet of his in which he smashed the first of the Rambler's model churches, we took occasion to point out how such painting contributed at all times to the artistic effect of the structure, while painted glass was but a day-light beauty, and after nightfall might almost be looked upon as detrimental to the effect of the building which it filled, owing to the cold fantastic outline of the lead lines which then come out into prominence.

Feeling this as we do, it is with no common interest that we now lay before our readers the details of one of those bold applications of the science of modern times, which have become so common that their absence is now almost a greater wonder than their presence, by which painted glass is made to contribute its share to the artistic whole of the building, which it fills, by night as well as by day. This result is of course obtained through means of gas, and the locale of the experiment is the House of Lords. Round the stonework of the windows, small gas pipes have been run externally, and these are pierced with numerous small jets; the result is, that after night-fall, the windows shine forth with their appropriate hues, not very brightly, not so as to contribute to the practical illumination of the chamber itself, but so as to add a new element to the artistic features which combine in producing the whole beauty which it should be the end of the creative mind of the first artist to produce.

The effect, in short, is a perpetuation of that singular, almost unearthly effect which must be so familiar to any of our readers who has worshipped in churches like S. Saviour's, Leeds, or S. Barnabas, in London, when the entire structure is lighted up for evensong, and yet the departing day still leaves its traces in the paling hues of the windows. We do not of course mean to say that the artificial light of gas is equal to this inimitable result, and we were conscious of something at first almost unnatural in the changeless perpetuation of a

combination, whose effect we could not but think depended in no little degree upon its transitoriness.

But with all these abatements which candour alone compels us to make, the experiment is very successful as a first attempt, and it will be a shame if it is not taken up and improved upon for the honour of Almighty GoD in His churches. We need not point out how plastic may be its working; how in great churches it may be used perpetually and for all the windows, in others only accommodated to the east window. Again, it may be applied to the distinction of great festive seasons. But enough of this; it is sufficient that the experiment has been made, an experiment which we may say has often haunted our day dreams, and that it has been so far very successful.

It is obvious that its general adoption will be detrimental to the elaborate external mouldings of the windows to which it may be accommodated. But as its use must be chiefly confined to town churches, we are not very sorry at the restriction which it creates; for elaborate external mouldings to the window tracery is not the most fruitful method of expending time and money in a town church.

In conclusion, we must remark, that in the House of Lords, great injustice is done to the experiment, by the actual system of lighting of that ornate Hall; which was adopted with no reference at all to this developement. Between each of the windows, which range clerestorywise, stands a niche at present empty, but destined to receive one of those antique heroes, who-as an orator at a public meeting, inviting his loyal auditors to do the same, stated-" rallied round their sovereign at Runnimede." The actual illumination of the House of Lords, wisely as things then stood, is arranged to bring these into prominence; the consequence is, that a pair of branches terminating in a large gas flame is attached to each niche, and that these flames of course tell primarily upon the windows in front of which they are placed, and go as far as any thing can well do, to ruin the effect of the illumination on the other side.

LEGAL OPINION ON THE POSITION OF THE CELEBRATING PRIEST-SS. PAUL AND BARNABAS, PIMLICO.

We propose, from time to time, as occasion may arise, to furnish our readers with papers relating to disputed rubrical questions and points of discipline, regard being had more especially to the legal view of the

cases.

In our last number appeared, what may have in some measure given rise to this determination, viz., the case relative to the sale of pews in Yeovil church; which we shall consider as the first of the series. In our present number we have furnished our readers with the case and opinion lately taken by the congregations of SS. Paul and Barnabas, in regard to the ritual observances in practice at those churches, and which not only called down so strong a condemnation from the Bishop

of London, but have been the means of driving one of the most zealous parish priests from the service of the Church.

We may state that the case has been slightly modified to suit our pages; the few alterations, however, which have been made in it have received the sanction of the original framer of it.

Our readers will also bear in mind that the practices numbered 2 and 3 were immediately discontinued by Mr. Bennett when objected to by the Bishop of London, and that the only reason why a legal opinion was taken upon them was, that they formed with the others the grounds of the Bishop's calling for Mr. Bennett's resignation as stated in his letter.

We subjoin the case and opinion.

CASE.

On S. Barnabas' day (11th June, 1850,) the church of S. Barnabas, Pimlico, was consecrated by the Bishop of London as a Chapel of Ease to the church of S. Paul's, Knightsbridge, under the incumbency of the Rev. W. J. E. Bennett.

The church and adjoining buildings had been built entirely by private subscription, and the clergy were supported by a portion of the offertory at S. Paul's, the richer portion of the parish being in the habit of attending divine service there.

The church was constructed both in design and ornament so as to enable the fullest possible attention to ritual observances being carried out, and the consecration was one of unusual ceremony, an octave of services being performed.

In the charge of the Bishop of London of October last, some severe strictures were made upon what were termed the "histrionic" proceedings of certain clergymen in the diocese, alluding evidently to the church of S. Barnabas (amongst others) and the officiating priests connected with it.

Public attention being thus drawn to the church, a rabble mob attempted to break into it during divine service, and the riot was continued on several successive Sundays, new vigour being instilled by the well known letter of the Premier to the Bishop of Durham.

A correspondence between the Bishop of London and Mr. Bennett which had commenced in July, 1850, and had subsequently been suspended in consequence of the Bishop's absence, was resumed, and certain points of ritual observance were required by the Bishop to be discontinued.

1. In celebrating the Holy Communion, the Priest standing in the centre of the west side of the table, with his back to the congregation, an assistant clergyman kneeling on the steps at each side of him.

2. Not giving the cup into the hands of the lay communicants, but putting it to their lips, while it is held by the Priest or Deacon.

3. Not delivering the bread into the hands of the communicants, but putting it into their mouths.

4. Beginning or rather prefacing the sermon with the words' In the Name of the FATHER, and of the Son, and of the HOLY GHOST;"

and on the preacher uttering these words the other clergy present 'standing up and crossing themselves.""

In an early stage of the correspondence, Mr. Bennett intimated to the Bishop that as he considered himself morally and spiritually bound not to oppose his lordship in those matters which as a diocesan, he had a right and duty to regulate, he was willing and ready to withdraw from a position in which the possibility of such an event might arise. In reply the Bishop again pressed for the abandonment of the practices objected to, adding that were Mr. Bennett to be restrained from them, his lordship did not think a sufficient casus would have arisen for his leaving the ministry to which, as his lordship stated, he had hitherto been so zealously devoted. On the 30th Oct. Mr. Bennett wrote to the Bishop contending that the practices referred to were founded on principles, and that he could not consistently abandon them, but he added that if the Bishop should be of continued opinion that he was guilty of unfaithfulness to the Church of England, and would signify his judgment as Bishop, that it would be for the peace and better ordering of the Church that he should no longer serve in the living of S. Paul, he would then send him a formal resignation. Several further letters ensued, in one of which the Bishop called upon Mr. Bennett to fulfil his offer of retiring, and accordingly on December 4th, Mr. Bennett wrote that, concluding in making such a call the Bishop wished to express his continued opinion that he, Mr. Bennett, was guilty of unfaithfulness to the Church of England, he accordingly thereby sent his resignation, of which on the 9th Dec. the Bishop wrote his acceptance. In the correspondence above mentioned, the Bishop in no instance directly charged Mr. Bennett with unfaithfulness to the Church of England, but such a charge was raised by implication only.

As soon as the result of this correspondence became known, the greatest sympathy was expressed on behalf of Mr. Bennett, not only by the congregations of S. Paul and S. Barnabas who had had abundant opportunities during several years past of witnessing his zealous efforts and the benefits arising from them, but also by the parishioners at large, and an almost universal wish was expressed to prevent the loss his removal would occasion to the parish.

The practices objected to by the Bishop were by no means disapproved of by the respective congregations of SS. Paul and Barnabas. They did not desire any alteration in them, and on the publication of the correspondence they could discover no sufficient reasons in the Bishop's letters for Mr. Bennett's removal. The fact that the Bishop had cautiously refrained from expressly charging Mr. Bennett with unfaithfulness to the Church of England became apparent to his congregation, and they could not but see that their parish Priest had been sacrificed to the public outcry raised by certain proceedings of the Church of Rome. An earnest desire arose that the Bishop should judicially state the points of which he considered Mr. Bennett's unfaithfulness to consist, an explanation not only fairly due to him, but to the congregation so materially involved in the issue, and accordingly a deputation of the congregation and parishioners attended the Bishop, and a subsequent correspondence ensued, by which this further ex

position of the Bishop's views was sought, but they wholly failed to elicit what was required, and his lordship ultimately declined further communication with the congregation upon the subject. The congregation were however, much dissatisfied with the position of the matter, and entertaining a very strong conviction that the practices which Mr. Bennett had refused to discontinue were strictly in accordance with the Church of England, they were unwilling to submit to the injury of Mr. Bennett's removal without an effort to retain him in his incumbency.

As regards the practices complained of by the Bishop, it was believed that for the most part they were not only strictly warranted, but enjoined by the rubric, and the correspondence showed that Mr. Bennett's opinion coincided with this view.

The opinion of counsel was therefore requested on behalf of the congregation and parishioners desirous of retaining Mr. Bennett in the incumbency of SS. Paul and Barnabas.

1. Whether, notwithstanding his determination of giving effect to his resignation, there exists any course open to the parishioners by which their object of retaining Mr. Bennett can be effected? 2. Whether the Bishop can be in any manner compelled to state seriatim his reasons for considering Mr. Bennett unfaithful to the Church of England?

3. Whether the practices numbered respectively 1, 2, 3, and 4, in the above case, and objected to by the Bishop, are legal, and authorized by the Church of England, so that a parish Priest may safely adopt them without liability to deprivation or other ecclesiastical proceedings?

Counsel were further requested to advise the congregations generally under the circumstances stated in the case.

OPINION.

1. Upon the first question proposed to us, we are clearly of opinion, that there is no course open to the parishioners, by which their object of retaining Mr. Bennett in the incumbency of S. Paul and S. Barnabas can be legally effected, Mr. Bennett having placed his resignation in the Bishop's hands, and the Bishop having accepted that resignation, the parishioners have no power to interfere, so as to prevent the appointment of another incumbent in the place of Mr. Bennett.

2. Upon the second question, we are of opinion, that the Bishop cannot in any manner be compelled to state seriatim his reasons for considering Mr. Bennett unfaithful to the Church of England. The Bishop appears to us to have complied substantially with the conditions required by Mr. Bennett in order to his resignation, but it is clear that the parishioners cannot insist upon any further explanation from the Bishop.

3. With respect to the practices referred to in the third question proposed to us, and numbered respectively 1, 2, 3, and 4, we are of opinion as follows:-1st. That in celebrating the Holy Communion, the proper position of the Priest is in strictness on the west side of the Altar. We think that the words of the rubric "standing before the