The Sun.
London, England, 1861-06-21 00:00:00

" That the Prolocutor be requested to carry to the Upper
House a copy of the report, together with the following
message That in obedience to the direction of his Grace
the President and of the Upper House, a committee of the
Lower House was appointed to examine the book entitled
" Essays and Reviews," and to report thereon to the Lower
House, in order that the Lower House might communicate
to the Upperlicuse its opinion whether there are sufficient
grounds for proceeding to synodical action on the book.
The Lower House now send to the Upper House a copy of
the report of that committee. The Lower House are not
prepared to recommend the passing of synodical judgment
upon the book, but they desire to assure the Upper House
+b.+ +-.3, •Hill give their most respectful attention to any
communication which may be sent down to them founded
on this report.' "

Archdeacon RANDALL-It might save time if I rise to
say, that immediately on that amendment being proposed I
shall appeal to the Prolocutor on the point of order whether
such an amendment can be put.
The Rev. C. E. KENNAWAY would second such an appeal.
The PROLOCUTOR would at once put it to the house
whether the amendment was a proper one, and having done
so declared that it was rejected by the house, a large majo-
rity being adverse to it.

THE MAKING OP A CANON,'

The proceedings were here interrupted by the entrance
of his Grace the President, accompanied by the bishops and
the legal officers and attendants of the archbishop, the ob-
ject being the formal enactment of a canon of the church,
a ceremony which has not been performed for upwards of
200 years. His Grace the Archbishop, having assumed the
presidential chair, proceeded to read the engrossed record,
the deed being held during the reading by his Grace and the
Prolocutor jointly. The deed merely recited that convoca-
tion, by virtue of the royal license, had rescinded the 29th
canon and substituted in lieu of it that which we have
already published.

His Grace then affixed his signature to the canon, and
was followed by the Bishops of Oxford, St. Asaph, and Lin-
coln, the only other members of the episcopal bench present.
After the bishops the members of the Lower House pro-
ceeded to sign, commencing with the deans, then the arch-
deacons, then doctors of divinity, and afterwards proctors
for chapters and dioceses; after which his Grace the Presi-
dent, the bishops, and their retinue retired.

ESSAYS AND REVIEWS.

The The diteebva.tesir wasil .thTenn
nr:ispuemoe:
s,
theTrheesopl:toioLnocwvhTiochit hsaeidprhoe
wosasedmawsi
hdohosetn
ihnaedn
xhwieoaust
as
kthate willing that
should to
faasiral:
voul said a
ratdiaseedn.durallep felt he was in a delnicamteocon
posi-
tion. He was nca anxioushi 'lnto avail himself of th.tehtepioawaueer
was
w conferredonn s\(Hear.)
from the
f Upper
House inquired whether this housmeeweeaasgien favour of
syno-
dical action, and they had to consider whether there was
which
hnon
sufficient ground for so proceeding. They were in a posi-
tion whether they were to do a judicial act with the whole
authority of convocation. 110 confessed in his own private
mind that this was not only an unhappy book, but the
worst book which had been published since the Refor-
mation. He adopted the views of the mover and se-
conder ; but he felt, if it were a dangerous box*, it could
not be suppressed by injustice. The greater the evil, the
more important it was that they should carefully consider
the remedy. Dr. Weanl had said he with ten thousands of
other clergy condemned the book, and had signed with them
the act of condemnation. Was then his rev. friend to be
both advocate and judge in the same cause? He said that
those who had signed the address had morally disqualified
themselves as judges. (" Hear, hear," and "No, no.") His
rev. friend would allow him to say that, as he reprobated
this book as destructive to Christian morality, yet if they
treated it with injustice they would only arouse the sym-
pathy of the English people in favour of its authors. He
had declined to serve on the committee because he felt that
after the language which had been used he could not grapple
with it fairly and honestly. Ile remembered that in 1786
an illegal act of this kind had suffocated convocation for
more than one hundred years. Convocation was a deliberate
assembly, but they were not competent to proceed to
synodical judgment without the license of the Crown. If
they had been commanded by the Upper House they
would have proceeded to petition the Crown. In 1689,
Bishop Burnet had said that any bishop could proceed
against the author of dangerous books in his own diocese,
but Convocation could not proceed judicially to censure
any book without hearing the author. (Hear, hear.)
It was said that what was now proposed to be done,
was what had been done with regard to Whiston's book.
He denied that altogether. At that time the opinion of
the judges was taken, and eight of the judges were of
opinion that Convocation had the power to condemn tenets
of heresy, but then they must condemn them with the
authors and maintainers of them. He believed that many
of the authors of the seven essays uoVf regretted they had
Put their hand to them. The minority of the judges being
four, were of opinion that Convocation could not summon
the author out of his diocese, but then they said there must
be the license of the Crown to proceed to censure. (Achdeacon
DENISON—NO, no.) His rev. friends were following neither
precedent. They did not follow the opinion of proceeding
against the book in the presence of the authors, nor the rule
laid down that they could not summon a clergyman out of
his diocese. lie felt if this court were proceeded with, the
case would be brought before the courts of law, and instead
of suppressing heresy they would themselves be suppressed.
He suggested that they should submit to the Upper House
that there was no precedent for the action recommended.
(Arctdeacon DENISON—I deny it.) If they were to pre-