, 1864-11-12

canon%ccl residence simply, and makea. the
etsa1n'l Of that prremptory, under a1l and
every ct1cupstiDce, except In certafn Persocs
1n-t5e service Of Institutions Of the General
church or Of the civil government.
Apart from all questions Of p4rochtal re1a-
! tions AID Diocesan franchise, Dr.. Cracratt by
tta: clauee WAS required to present Letters
Dinis:ory as living on hIs farm. But tha
existent case OF his officiating in Grace
church hid nothing to do with It. He claim
cd to settle In Grace church, Galcsourg, as
Its minister, and exercised the functions for
by the conditions precedent Indispensable.
You say "The Canon allowed him six
months and thus, am informed, is the uni
vc1sal understanding Of the clergy" beg
| to differ from you and express the conyIc-
! ton, that there could not be found q clergy
man, whose opinion on Canon laV would BE-
held of weight, who would. IN writing over
Lis OWL name, say, that by the CAnons, the
presentation: :of Dimissory Lettsra WAS not
required until Rector had bean settled for
! Elk months or more la bis Parish. There Is
no need for me then to follow the detail of q
large proporttono of sour letter. Il Involves
an utter mtaconst1uction Of the Law, it Ia an
fact; and hence all your bitter cen
| sure OF me, the counting Of dates ton
which the whole fabric would rest" your
rseh ihference from 1t OF MT "after- thought" :"
your apology TOR sinking the record, after
you had Joined is3ue upon it, because it really
.''justify such grave. though hasty acrion
upon such merely harrow and technical
ground" the charge that have "sought
refuge Of IN the spirit, but in the letter Of
the Canon Law. .tnas waited Tor "two
days'' to expire, "and lol the axe Of eccle.
two Days had elapsed before you Illuminated
your sentence, ,""for this perfectly trivial
and technical violation of the Canon" All
this, siz, allow me to Say, is just balderdash,
no more, no lessf -
But am quite willing to follow your other
to eOme extent If not entirely, under the con-
troll Of this fundamental mistake, which has
y3tiated your whole letter; viz: the forced
ar mistaken application Of subsection to
the settlement Of a rector and the false judg-
ment consequent Of that part-I may say the
gard to sLetters Dlmfssors'' ike that in re-
gard to 1he residence OF Bishops, and many
others which 1 find in your canonIcM code,
ments, which, in my profession are termed
Directory that is, enactmenss designed for
securing regularity Of procedure, aud which
1t Is supposed parties interested will adopt,
but Mhlch, nevertheless are not clo1had With
apy. penalty for their non-adoptioa, unless
fraudulent or criminal intent."'
It would Ill become me to imply that your
definition of What are straogsl7 called aDl-
rectory" {lueus q non 9uceaio), is not entirely
accurate, I am afraid, ho Wever, that In our
crude apprehension 1t might be Inferred from
1t that there were aome ststutes which
might be observed or not, ut the descretion
Of the party-while suppose IT mainly re-
fers to lnches in officials, Of which the Ju1ge
determines whether they are fatal OF imma.
terial as devintiops from the forms prescrib-
ed. big to quote 8 standard authority:
When Statutes direct certain proceedings
to be do1ealn certain way, or II certain
provisions Of tima and form does not appear
Essential to the judicial mind, the PROCEED
ings Gre htld valid though the command of
the statute 10 disregarded or dlsobeJed. In
these cases, by soma what singular use of
Language the statute is said to be 'Dtrscsayy.'
In other caees the statute Is held to be I'm
perative or mandatory. The questions which
arise under tnls head are those only Of ap-
plication. The statute ia sufficiently clear,
the only point is what shall be the conse-
ounce OF q dlsobedienc8 Of its dirccuoas."-
Ssdk a0iek's Itsat., S6S- $50.
that the Canon "ol the residence Of bishop''
is merely s:Directory." It was so esteemed
pfen passed and in certain degree Is only
the htterance Of a truism. But so far as the
others are concerned must d1tfcr from your
classification. can not at all admit the
s1mll!ude bstWeea that and the csnoDs which
you call tin regard to Dimlssory Leteers,''
and the obligation Incl: tent to these sLettsrs"
for officiating IN Parish--the Cnuons which
govern IN the case under discussion, aud
have btens 80 fully quoted can not name
any that *re more mandatory Ia form tnsn
to present." SC, "a minister removing
shall, in order to guin residence, present."
&c. There may be In them particulars which
the ttjudicial mind"-the Blshop-might al
low as $directory" !. E. not massriai deYia-
tlon from the prescribed order-but in them
stlves they are compulsory aud at least SO Jar
imperative as that they Prevent 8 clergyman's
eeltement without them. The penalty for
nou-adoption is tha loss Of the whols coudl-
tlonal estate. Infer that 1t would be the
prerogattVe OF the Judge only to determine
which, even oi 4tdirectory' variations or
neglects, might DO allowed; and this is a
discretionary action, quite in harmony With
common sense and Justice, for which be
must be responsible. For my oWn guld ance,
however, In canontcal Interpretation, 1 pre-
fer the rule OF Lord Tenterden-sI think
there is always danger In giving. effect to
what Is called the equity of statute, 1t is
|: much safer and better to rely ou the plain.
Words."-G B. E. &. ATS.
must further dissent from Whist you say,
that what is said OF mtsaemeanors BY the
violation OF the canons "dues not refer to
merely technical violation OF the letter of
auch canons ~ that in regard to Letters DI-
mieaory."
While should fully accord with Jour OBJ
jection to IN iDpeachmEnt for merely "tech-
nical violations" at all, 1 canAot admit that
the violation Of tuch uanons Is q merely
technical matter. You will scarce find an
agreement with such an opinion in the
Gauzch. The Canona In question are felt to
be among the most mandatory and practi-
cally Important of all the Canons. The whole
order Of the Church depends upon the OBJ
BerVancc OF them, and 1t would exhaust pages
to tetai the 1a1nit1ed interests which t6ey
the diocese, the parish. the ministry and the
latty. sWhere the Cauo1s are imperative upon
the conditions precedent for settlement. aud
involve as they really do this range Of vital
interests inherent and dependent upon them,
! cannot imagine case more f1agrantly .
"misdemeanor," and carrying With 1t more
intrinaically the maza in Sc, than long aud
Intelligent neglect Of all the provisions. aud
at the same time the actual seixing of all the
prerogatives conferred By them when fully
ooeyed. You lay down as the principle to
limit Whist might perhaps seem an exlrava-
, etructtoas, that 'tIf a clergyman refuses for
an unreasonable time to; present his letters
after you have reminded him of the Canon,
and given him. proper opportunity for e1-
PLANTATION, 1t would then present case OF
contumacious disregard of the canon and Of
ycur authority which would cali Tor your in
1erpositlon."
In the case Of mature and experienced
clergyman, who has for fifteen years or
more passed from parish to parish,
and changed. frequently his ecclesiastical
i ,hvonS would be 5aeolo9s to
tulnees, he could under any clrcumstaa-
ces let euch matter slip; and that tha res-
try Of the church to which he went would
fall into the same oblivion. Your own legal
maxim shows how little faith ia to De reposed
IN such- bting mere tnadvertence, or worthy
excuse, "Nelther Ignorance nor good faith
are excuses for the violation Of the statute;''
"1gnorantia !egis 5setainens ersusat" But in
the cast OF DR.. Csacratt, satisfactory proofs
in my possession that be acted intelligently
nnd With purpose, and the expression which
you sa5 % shocked you that ho has remain.
1t gaze him." Ia my own conviction prudently
formed. With much that Is influential and
direct to show that his violation for 30 many
months Of actual pastoral engagement, is
contumacfous disregard Of the Canons and Of
my authority. I know Of nothing that would
ed Of the Canons, and his duty under them,
and deliberately believe, chose the eccen-
tic path Of disohediecce.
But have studiously forbo1ne to treat
thus publicly the Gaze Of d.. Cracraft for fear
Of an invasion ofanother judicial tribunal. Be
lore that the facts viii be properly lid,
and the relations which may determine his
aninas Of disobedience, w1lfuaness or contu-
macy, both from the letter and spirit Of the
canons.
need not add for you, who SO well know
It in your own profession, that :" the dis
art naazd prohibitta only or tnaza IN Sc, Is now
exploded, and breach Of the statute law In