made a subject of discussion, any other member might have done the same; so that a general review might have been the consequence. As for the anthems, they were such as might have been expected from the musical sufficiency of the proposer. There was another matter of a different nature, comprehended under the determination of the two houses. A Rev. member of the convention had brought to it a manuscript work of his own, on an important subject of religion, which he wished to be sanctioned by the body. It is not easy to calculate the time they might have been kept together, for a due examination of a work of this sort; nor how many similar applications in future would have grown out of compliance in the present instance. The reasons of the conventional measures in the above cases, are recorded with the hope, that they will have weight on the like occasions, if they should occur.

For the determination, see the Appendix, No. 29. The reference to the bishops and to other ecclesiastical authorities, for the obtaining of information on the subject of a theological school, originated thus. The convention in South Carolina, had instructed their deputies to propose the establishing of such an institution; and accordingly, it had been moved and discussed in the house of clerical and lay deputies, and by them negatived. On the last day of the session, it was moved in the house of bishops, by the bishop of the church in that state. The question was argued with much interest, although with the utmost moderation, by that bishop on one side,

and by the assistant bishop of the church in the diocess of New York, on the other. The design interfered especially with the views of the latter; who had adopted measures and issued proposals, for the instituting of a seminary under the immediate superintendence of himself and his successors. It was to have been seated in New Jersey, and the bishop in that state was to have been joined in the superintendence. The present author, conscious that he had not given much attention to the subject in this comparative view of it, and perceiving that existing circumstances would prevent a determination during the present session, avoided the opening of his mind as to the merits of the question.

The proposal respecting a copy-right of the book of Common Prayer, had been suggested as a mean of obtaining an handsome fund for beneficial purposes. Besides the difficulties in the way, suggested in the instrument relative to the obtaining of information on the subject; there is the insuperable objection, which it seemed the most prudent not to notice, that although the church does not now contemplate alterations in her liturgy, yet she ought not to commit herself in a measure, which would put it beyond her power for a considerable course of years. To have given this as a reason, might have been misunderstood by the public. Independently on that circumstance, there were those who had been formerly witnesses of jealousy excited by this cause, which they wished never to see renewed; so long as there are other ways of guarding the integrity of the book

against corrupt copies. In most and probably all of the present, there are some errata; which, in general, may be detected by the reader; and which might be more effectually guarded against by an authorita

tive table.

The declaration of the bishops, approved of by the other house, relative to the identity of this church with the body formerly known by the name of "the church of England in America," arose from the circumstance, that in some cause or causes pending in the courts, this identity had been denied.

ap

The bishops were informed by one of their body, that not long ago, the sentiment had been expressed to him by a gentleman high in office, who grounded what he alleged on the book of Common Prayer, edited in 1785. The title of this book declares it to be a proposal. It was never ratified, as will pear on a reference to the journals. Had a subsequent convention ratified it, the inference would have been untenable in regard to a church, the principles of which, as of the church from which it became separated by a dispensation of Providence, declares its competency to every act of self-government. The identity of the body remained, although accompanied by newly acquired independence. Still the plea, on the ground taken from it, is invalidated by the non-acceptance of the book. It being foreseen, that this pretence will be set up, whenever the appeal shall come on in Washington; there was supposed to be a call for the declaratory instrument, which has occasioned the present explanation.

PP

There was a consideration which rendered the declaration especially expedient but not proper to be noticed on the journal. The opposite principle was the known opinion of some leading characters of Virginia; who, on that ground had defended the act of the legislature of that state, which deprived our communion of its churches and its glebes.

Although the question here referred to, was brought before the convention incidentally; yet, as it may hereafter be a subject of more considerable attention, and big with important consequences; occasion shall be taken to state what the reasons for supporting the position, that what is now called "the Episcopal church in the United States of America," is precisely, in succession, the body formerly known by the name of "the church of England in America;" the changes of name having been the dictate of a change of circumstances, in the civil constitution of the country.*

1st. From the beginning of the organizing of this church, the principle has prevailed. It impelled the applying to England for consecration, in preference to another country, where it might have been easily

*Since the penning of these remarks, the author has seen, in print, a serious endeavour to date the origin of the Episcopal church, from the period of the consecration of her bishops. The position is rested on grounds, which do not here seem to call for a professed refutation: but it may be remarked that the sentiments expressed by the house of bishops, and advocated in this place, apply to the notion now referred to, as well as to that of which they were professedly intended.

had; without the making of requests, not to be complied with but by the interference of the legislature of a foreign country, which the venerable persons petitioned might not be able to obtain.

2dly. It will very much tend to check the spirit of innovation, on any essential point of doctrine: because, if such a matter should be attempted, the original standard will be appealed to; and the adherents to it will plead, that they are the church from which the innovators, whether many or few, have departed. This needs not to hinder alterations in less important matters; because, notwithstanding the parentage gloried in by us, we are an independent church; and so acknowledged by that from which we plead to have descended.

3dly. The security of property, is a consideration. This has been spoken of already: but there shall be added information received from a respectable source. It is, that on the arrival of bishop Seabury in Connecticut, he consulted his friend Dr. Wm. Samuel Johnson of Stratford, whose leaning to him and his cause with a strong attachment to the Episcopal church, cannot be doubted, as to his right to the income of a handsome landed property, left for the support of a future bishop of the church of England in America. Dr. Johnson is said to have been of opinion, that bishop Seabury could not claim it.

4thly, and principally; regard is here had to their being a fence to the truths of the gospel, prevalent in the days of Edward the 6th. Any superad