Virginia Argus. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1796-1816, 1804-05-30

SFStsSeIS OF the EoOr or ire SAD County.
In the Dill OF complaint. which was laid before
tue Chanoelior, the grounds of the title, which
tne Protestant Episcopal Church claims in the
Giebe lands are thus e<hibiled Thai the
purchase Of the SAID Giebe was for the benelis
oil the religious society called the Church of En-
! gland. in the parish store aid, - be applied
the use c! its ministers from time time, but
. continuing rs the property of the said society,
even when there was no incumbent: tha, by
the revolution, the establishment was Destroy
ed but the said society remained uninpaired
IN the rights of property it being fstt. usti-
! nee by the history Of the day, that member
OF The convention of 1776, in the most remote
! manner, ventured TO suggest the deprivation OF
the church Of their property and the same COM
'ven5ion, which sat again in November 1776,
gave what your orators are advised, was so Tar
! : an eN5emporaneou5 exposition OF the new
stitutior., as to make p1inly and unequivocally
the distinction between an Establishment which
| was 10 create future burthens for the support
! of a particular Clergy, and the rights OF The
Church of England to the properly already
CURED that your orators might it it were
oessary, refer to The various acts or the legisla-
ture, acknowledging the identity OF the pTotes.
tant episcopal church with the church of En-
gland in Virginia, and confirming the property
OF the latter 20 the former, sources of title,
altho the said a6iS are repealed, right vesting
under a statute, not being Invested by its repeal.
that this identity beng admitted by the menbe,s
of the church of England itself is not question
able By others, although if it were questioned,
q u IS easily shown from the principles OF
church: that bar for the Incorporating act OF
i 1924, and the subsequent acts of confirmation,
the church of England. which the legislature
! itself repeatedly recognized TO exist from the
| declaration of Independence to that time, would
! have been carried on by the appointment of
vesuieS and ministers, as usual that the petit
-. e. - I. L :.
| new church was noe created, bul Al old one
| preserved under new name, tor the avoidance
OF ! denomination, which might De odious, and
| OF cavils which the assumption of new name
3 NJ gin, generate: that IT is most unreasonable,
thaj re notification of the old form, after be-
{ ing sanctioned by the legislature. should be
| construed +ntO Legislative right, to deprive
| the rel gious society sself OF It's properly, be-
{ cause ,hegpyeservation Of the old form was pre-
'ven;ed by that very sanction: and that if a
rght Of escheat is claimed the usual course of
! Judicial enquiry ought 70 have been observed,
on whi,h 1t is Supposed the right OF the Com
monwealth to the said Glebe, could never be
I obtained"
The answer of the Attorney General denied
these several allegations. and denturred TO so
much Of the bill rs payed for an injunction to
sroP the sale.
An appeal was granted by the Chancellor to
the Court Ct appeals.
CoURT or HFPEALs, Nay 4th, 1904.
/ Present Judges Lyons, CARRlNGroN,
| RoANE &. TucKER
! Nestry and church-Wardens OF the PAD
! rish Of Manchester, IN The county of Ches-
Oyeraeers Of the Poor Of ,be said County.
Mr. CALL for The Appeiiants) laid dowa
two positions
1st That the Globes were vested in the church,
when the act OF 1901 passed
2nd. That they were not divestsi by this AT.
1st. They were vested III the Church both by
the laws which were passed bejare and attey The
rcVoiulon. (See summary Of those laws in
the End part, vol Tuck. Blac The aG OF
1901 gave perpetual succession TO the vestriss-
Hence they had the power of holding properly
! and transmitting 1t TO their successors. AS this
IS one of the great rights Of incorporated
company, the church may in this respect
1T least be considered as a corporation, AL.
though it had not received a technical charter,
which shoald give it all the other rights of an in.
corporated company, such as tho right of acqui-
ring and alternating prope.ty.-Whateverp proper
! ty then IS given TO ihem any oEe time, nusi be
! considered as belonging to II, so logS as there
( remained any members of the chmch, who by
this act are authorised to succeed 20 il. But the
act of l748 did confer certain property on it, IN
1
assessment upon all tithabe persons in their res
Pective parishes, and apply it TO the purchase Of
Glcbe for the use Of the minister. Several laws
were passed during and after our revolution,
which acknowledged & respected this iuvestituro
OF property. The ad of 1875. passed by the We.
ny Assembly, which had overturned so many oE
orr ancient institutions expressly reserves TO the
use of the church, by law established the several
parts of the Globe land already purchased. The
aet OF 1884, which Incorporates thc church. gives
to the minister (f there be one) and the yestry.
men respectively and their SUCCESSORS forever, the
power Of holding the property already belonging
10 It in each parish. The ad Of 1886, which
repeats this Incorporating al. still saves to all
We igious societies the property to them,
respectively belonging So dat in the Whole
chain + legislative proceedings, from t748to17SS
or 1901. he could not discover s,ugie law which
is no, either silent the rights of the church, or
which does not expressly acknowledge ndreserye
its Ugh, to the Gebe land
I'd The aGs oi 1898 and 1901 however, IN.
ierrupt This uniform admission Of vested rirht.
The first repeals ell The preceding laws the last
! aPpropriates the Glebes 10 such purposes as i
! majority Of the parishioners might diseG Mr..
! Call, however, thought thar these laws could not
atett the rights Of property. If rights be ac-
CURED under an eNislirg law, they arc not LOST
by inc repeal If rights be ves'ed by law, they