portant judgment is no more than to declare the opinion of the Court, that the churchwardens and the minority in vestry assembled have, in this instance, pursued a course fully warranted by law in compelling parties to perform the obligation imposed upon them by the common law of the land. All the powers with which the spiritual court is invested by law to compel the reparation of the church are left still untouched by this decision. If that court is empowered, as is stated by Lyndewode (voce, subpana) and other ecclesiastical writers, to compel the churchwardens to repair the church, by spiritual censures to call upon them to assemble the parishioners together by due notice to make a sufficient rate,—to punish such of the parishioners as refuse to perform their duty in joining in the rate, by excommunication (that is, since the statute of 53 Geo. III. c. 127, by imprisonment), and under the same penalty to compel each parishioner to pay his proportion of the church-rate; the same power will still remain with the spiritual court, nothwithstanding the decision in this case.

It is scarcely, perhaps, likely that the churchwardens will now proceed criminally against parishioners who refuse the rates for, as rates

are now pronounced valid which are made by themselves and minorities in vestry, they could not, perhaps, successfully or legally do so, for, in such case, the parishioners who refused the rate would not have been guilty of any ecclesiastical offence. In a recent case, however, called the Norwich case, a different course was adopted. It was not sought in that case to enforce a rate made by the minority of the vestry; but to punish the refractory parishioners by ecclesiastical censures and criminal proceedings were accordingly instituted against one of the parties in the Court of Arches, by virtue of letters of request from the Consistorial Court of Norwich. The citation called upon John Francis, a parishioner of the parish of St. George, Colegate, Norwich, to appear and answer articles "for having wilfully and contumaciously obstructed, or at least refused to make, or join or concur in the making of a sufficient rate or assessment, for providing funds in order to defray the expense of the necessary repairs of the church." The defendant appeared under protest and contended that the citation did not disclose any ecclesiastical offence: but Sir Herbert Jenner Fust overruled the protest, and assigned him to appear absolutely.

A prohibition was indeed subsequently obtained from the Court of Queen's Bench to restrain the Court Christian from proceeding with the suit but the judgment of the Temporal Court, far from denying the right of the Ecclesiastical Court to punish the refractory parishioner, expressly recognizes such right; and the prohibition issued upon the ground that the citation was not sufficiently explicit, and did not sufficiently shew a refusal or obstruction of the rate, under circumstances which were necessarily inexcusable. It had,

indeed, been previously decided that criminal proceedings could not be sustained against a parishioner for refusing to repair his parish church; unless it appeared that the conduct of the parishioner was wilful and contumacious, and also that in consequence of the refusal of the rate the church became dilapidated.

CHAPTER V.

On the proceedings in the Ecclesiastical Courts to enforce the payment of Church-rates.

Ir does not fall within the intention, of this work, to point out the mode of proceeding, in the Ecclesiastical Courts, for the subtraction of church-rates. It may be useful however, by way of caution to churchwardens, to mention the usual grounds upon which payment of a church-rate is disputed in these courts.

First. That the rate was illegally made. Secondly. That the rate was made for an illegal purpose.

Thirdly. That the Defendant is unfairly assessed.

Fourthly. That the Defendant is assessed in respect of property for which he is not liable.

Fifthly. That the rate is unnecessary ; which means that the churchwardens are in the actual possession of funds, clearly applicable to the church-rate, and sufficient, if so applied, to render the rate unnecessary. In like manner if there be an uncollected rate, such being sufficient. In these cases the court would pronounce against the validity of the rate.

CHAPTER VI.

On their duties with respect to Pews and Sittings in the Church.

THE general law, with respect to pews and sittings, seems not sufficiently understood by churchwardens; and, as erroneous notions upon this subject have led to contention and practical inconvenience, it may be of use to give a summary of the grounds upon which the law now

rests.

By the general law, and of common right, all the pews in the parish church are the common property of the parish: they are for the use, in common, of the parishioners, who are all entitled to be seated orderly and conveniently, so as best to provide for the accommodation of all. The arrangement and distribution of the seats rest with the churchwardens, as the parochial officers of the ordinary, and subject always to his revision and control. Neither the minister nor the vestry have any authority in this matter, as often erroneously supposed: they are not the