same. They have, however, some important differences which must be borne in mind, the chief of which are as follows:

Firstly. That criminal suits are open to any person, and may be commenced by a person whether he has any right to be protected or not, e.g., by a dissenter; while civil suits can only be brought by a person showing some interest to be protected by the suit. In criminal suits the office of the judge is promoted, that is, the proceedings are taken nominally in the name and under the sanction of some bishop. The bishop may refuse his sanction, but if he give it he has no control over the proceedings. The suit does not abate by the death of the bishop or by his resignation of his see, but the title of the suit in each case must be changed.

Where the promoter dies a proper person may be substituted in his place to carry on the suit.

Secondly. The first plea in a civil suit is called the libel, while in criminal suits it is styled the articles. In civil suits the plaintiff can require personal answers on oath from the defendant, i.e., require him to admit facts in his knowledge, whereas the defendant cannot be called upon to answer in a criminal suit.

Thirdly. When criminal proceedings are taken against a person in holy orders, the proceedings are taken under the Church Discipline Act.

Both kinds of suits may be commenced in three ways, viz., by citation, by decree, and by monition. A fourth way, by act on petition, is practically only applicable to civil suits. The most usual method is by citation.

Civil suits are brought in respect of rights partly of a civil and partly of a spiritual character, and are limited to subjects connected with the moral principles or the legal establishment of the church.

Ordinary instances of civil suits are suits for the perturbation of a pew or church seat, the subtraction of church rates, and the granting of faculties. Criminal suits are proceedings to punish and reclaim a sinful offender, by judicial admonition or an infliction of the severer censure of the church. They include church discipline and the correction of all offences of a spiritual kind. Criminal suits purport to be brought pro salutate anima, and are directed to the reformation of the offender's manners and excesses. (Coote's Ecclesiastical Practice, 104, 260; E. Smith's Law and Practice of the Ecclesiastical Courts, 81, 82, 77.)

68. A monition is issued to an incumbent and churchwardens ordering them to remove certain ornaments, or to show cause to the contrary. What fucts relating to the promovent personally, must be stated on the face of the monition in order to support it as a good pleading; and what principle of ecclesiastical law is involved in the fact so to be stated?

The monition must show on its face such an interest in the person by whom it is set in force as would have entitled him to institute and carry on a civil suit in the ordinary way by citation, and must therefore contain an allegation that the person instituting the proceedings has the status of parishioner of the parish. The principle of ecclesiastical law involved is that the person instituting the proceedings must have an interest, and that interest must appear in the monition. (Fagg v. Lee, L. R. Adm. Ecc. 135, 153; Mozley's Law Exam. Journal, No. 49, p. 137.)

69. By the 3rd and 13th sects. of the Church Discipline Act, 1840 (3 & 4 Vict. c. 86), a special function is assigned to the bishop of the diocese in which an offence by a clerk in holy orders is alleged to have been committed, in connection with the institution of preliminary proceedings against such clerk under the Act. State the nature of this special function, and refer to and explain the practical effect of the judicial interpretation which has been placed upon these enactments by the House of Lords.

By 3 & 4 Vict. c. 86, s. 3, it is provided that "in every case of any clerk in holy orders who may be charged with any offence against the laws ecclesiastical, or concerning whom there may exist scandal or evil report as having offended against the said laws, it shall be lawful for the bishop of the diocese within which the offence is alleged or reported to have been committed, on the application of any party complaining thereof, or if he shall think fit, of his own mere motion to issue a commission for the

purpose of making enquiry as to the grounds of such charge or report

By sect. 13, it is further provided that "it shall be lawful for the bishop, if he thinks fit, to send the case by letters of request to the Court of Appeal of the province there to be heard and determined."

By 37 & 38 Vict. c. 85 (The Public Worship Regulation Act, 1874), which also applies to the facts in the case to be presently quoted, there is no provision for the summoning of a commission of enquiry, but three parishioners can make an application to the bishop, who then has an arbitrary discretion to determine whether the suit shall proceed or not. It is further provided by sect. 18 that where sentence has been pronounced against an incumbent for an offence under 3 & 4 Vict. c. 86, he shall not also be proceeded against under the later Act, and vice versâ.

Where a parishioner of the parish of C. made a complaint to the bishop under sect. 3 of the earlier Act in respect of offences against the laws ecclesiastical, the bishop declined to issue a commission or to send the case to the Provincial Court, not on the ground that the matters complained of were not offences against the ecclesiastical law, or were of too unsubstantial a character to call for enquiry, but on the ground that the rector was of advanced age, and that the complaint was made in opposition to the expressed wishes of the great majority of the parishioners. A writ of mandamus was then applied for directed to the bishop commanding him to issue a commission to enquire into the matter of the complaint, or to send the case to the Provincial Court by letters of request. It was, however, held (by the House of Lords), that the above-mentioned sections do not prescribe two alternative courses, one of which must be taken, but that the bishop has a discretion, so that he can refuse to allow any proceedings to be instituted against a clerk accused of ecclesiastical offences. (Julius v. The Bishop of Oxford, (H. L.) 49 L. J. Q. B. 517; Law Rep. 5 App. Cas. 214.)

The words "it shall be lawful," when used in a statute, are in themselves always permissive, not compulsory. Where it has been held that there is an obligation to exercise an authority conferred by such words, the obligation must be found in the context of the statute, or in the nature of the act authorised. (Ibid.)

70. Contrast the modes of instituting proceedings under the Church Discipline Act, 1840, and the Public Worship Act, 1874.

All criminal proceedings against clerks in holy orders are now regulated by the Church Discipline Act, 1840 (3 & 4 Vict. c. 86). In any case where a clerk in holy orders is charged with any

offence against the laws ecclesiastical, or scandal or evil report exists concerning him, the bishop of the diocese within which the offence is alleged to have been committed has a discretion to issue his commission to make an enquiry as to the grounds of such charge or report, on the application of any party complaining or on his own motion. Before he issues such a commission, the bishop must give fourteen days' notice to the accused of his intention to issue it, and the notice must state the offence, with the name, addition, and residence of the relator.

Instead of issuing such commission the bishop may, in his discretion, at once send the case by letters of request to be tried in the Court of Appeal of the province. All proceedings under this Act must be commenced within two years after the commission of the offence charged, unless conviction for the offence has been obtained in any court of common law. Where a conviction has been so obtained proceedings may be brought within six calendar months after such conviction.

The Public Worship Regulation Act, 1874 (37 & 38 Vict. c. 85), merely provides a more expeditious mode of proceeding in six classes of cases (mentioned in the Act) than is provided under the ordinary procedure of the Court. Proceedings under this Act are commenced by a representation made to the bishop that one or more of the six cases has occurred. The representation may be made by (1) the archdeacon of the archdeaconry within which the church or burial-ground is situated; or (2) a churchwarden of the parish; or (3) three parishioners of the parish; or (4) in the case of a cathedral or collegiate churches, any three inhabitants of the diocese. The representation must be accompanied by a declaration, by the persons making it, that they are members of the Church of England. Under both Acts the bishop has a judicial discretion to allow the proceedings to continue or not. (E. Smith's Summary of Ecclesiastical Law and Practice, 91-98.)

APPENDIX A.

THE

QUESTIONS SET IN THE HONOURS EXAMINATION HELD IN JANUARY, 1883; WITH THE ANSWERS THERETO.

1. PRINCIPLES OF THE LAW OF REAL AND PERSONAL PROPERTY AND THE PRACTICE OF CONVEYANCING.

1. In a sale by auction of freehold, copyhold and leasehold property, what usual conditions of sale are still necessary? and what conditions, which were formerly usually inserted, are rendered unnecessary by the Conveyancing Act of 1881 ?

Besides any special conditions rendered necessary by the state of the particular title, the following are the usual conditions still

necessary :-
:-

1. As to amount of bidding, and whether vendor sells with or without reserve, or subject to right to bid (30 & 31 Vict. c. 48). 2. As to deposit.

3. As regards the leasehold property, the tenant's fixtures, and as regards the freehold property, the timber, shall be purchased at a valuation.

4. The date and description of instrument which vendor has selected as the commencement of his title.

5. As to identity of property sold with property described in title deeds.

6. As to errors of description.

7. As to payment of balance of purchase-money and execution of assurance.

Y