THE following is a copy of the address which, on Wednesday, the 26th of February, was presented to his Grace the Archbishop of Armagh, from the dioceses of Down and Connor and Dromore, on the subject of the education of the poor of Ireland. It is signed by 18,916 persons, of whom about 6000 are said to be Protestant dissenters; and affixed to the important document are to be found the names of 3 noblemen, 49 deputy-lieutenants of counties and magistrates, and 141 clergymen of the established church. The deputation to the primate consisted of the Dean of Dromore, the Archdeacon of Connor, Roger Hall, Esq., D.L., Narrow-water; J. W. Maxwell, Esq., D.L., Finnebrogue; R. E. Ward, Esq., Bangor Castle; and George Dunbar, Esq., D.L.

To his Grace the Lord Primate of all Ireland, and their Lordships, the Bishops of Kildare, Clogher, Kilmore, Down and Connor and Dromore, Cork and Cloyne, Killaloe and Clonfert, Ossory and Ferns, and Cashel.

May it please your Lordships,-We, whose names are hereunto affixed, residents in the united dioceses of Down and Connor and Dromore, deeply anxious concerning the " Education of the Poor in Ireland," and sincerely "interested in the maintenance and extension" of scriptural schools throughout our land, beg leave to tender to your lordships our grateful thanks for the "counsel and support" upon this important subject, which, under the "guidance and blessing of Almighty God," you have been enabled lately to afford. To the sentiments set forth in your lordships' address we desire most cordially to respond. To the " reluctance and regret" which you feel when conscientiously obliged to disapprove of any of the provisions of the state-to your unabated condemnation of the national system of education," despite of certain modifications of its rules from time to time introduced by the commissioners"-to the grounds of such objections, namely, the continued exclusion of the Word of God during the hours of general instruction—the injury thus done to the best interests of the youthful poor of all religious denominationsthe insult thus offered to that fundamental principle of our reformed faith, "the sufficiency of the Holy Scriptures," and the aid thus given to “ the false principles of the church of Rome," by "submitting to its spiritual tyranny in this respect"-to your lordships' sentiments, as lately imparted to us on these all-important subjects, we most cordially and thankfully respond. We praise God for the faithful and effective manner in which he hath enabled you to expose the specious substitution of apparently parental, for really papal authority; and to detect the sophisms with which perverted human wisdom has endeavoured to involve the simplicity of the fifth commandment, by marking, as you have done, the important "distinction" between the excitement of undue resistance on the part of the child, and the sanction of unlawful, because unscriptural, restraint on the part of the parent. Your efforts thus to vindicate for the Romanists of Ireland rights which otherwise would be surrendered; to preserve for the child of tender years liberties he cannot assert

for himself; and to maintain for all the sufficiency and supremacy of God's Holy Word; become your high and sacred station, add due weight to your ecclesiastical authority, and must prove a blessing to that portion of Christ's church over which you are appointed to preside. And if we thank God for your lordships' pure, we thank him no less for your peaceable wisdom. We desire humbly but earnestly to follow where you lead, in the uncompromising assertion of principle; in the defence of the spiritual rights of our countrymen; in watchfulness over the interests of truth; but at the same time, “in gentleness, and long-suffering, and meekness;" by God's help doing his will, (as your fatherly counsel enjoins,) and "leaving the issue of all to his unerring wisdom." May his providence long spare you, most rev. fathers, to "counsel and support" us; and may his Spirit long preserve amongst us, "truth, unity, and concord," for Christ's sake.

31st January, 1845.

To this address the Lord Primate replied as follows:

My Lords and Gentlemen,-I receive, with very great satisfaction, the address which you have done me the honour to present to me, and I am truly gratified to perceive that not only the clergy, but so many thousands of the laity of the North of Ireland concur in the views, respecting education, which have been put forth by my right reverend brethren and myself. It gives me sincere pleasure to find that amongst the names subscribed to this declaration of your sentiments, are those of such a number of the influential landed proprietors of the counties of Down and Antrim—of the intelligent and independent middle class-and of persons in an humbler sphere, who, while they are themselves most deeply interested, as parents, in the system of instruction that pervades the country, furnish, in their own peaceful and industrious habits, and in their respectability of character, a living proof of the benefits which result from a sound and scriptural education. It adds also peculiar interest to your address, that it bears the signatures of 6000 persons, who, although they differ from the communion of the established church, yet, in affixing their names to such a document, testify their approval of the principles of education which we advocate, and afford a demonstration that the schools which are conducted on those principles are successful in effecting united education, and thereby in attaching the inhabitants of the country to each other in the bonds of united good-will and brotherhood. May such feelings of amity be deepened and extended in our native land! And may the blessing of the Almighty so rest upon the instruction given to our youth, that their advancement in piety and charity may ever keep pace with their advancement in literary acquirements and secular knowledge. I have the honour to be, my lords and gentlemen, your faithful servant,

JOHN G. ARMAGH,

LEGAL DECISIONS.

1. Publication of Poor-rates.

THE laws for the compulsory relief and maintenance of the poor of the country were first established in the reign of Queen Elizabeth. Under 43rd statute, chap. 2, of that reign, the basis of our present system of parochial taxation, churchwardens and overseers of a parish possessed an authority, almost unlimited, of rating the visible property of the parishioners, towards raising a provision for the benevolent purposes contemplated by the legislature. That statute provided that "the churchwardens and overseers of the poor should, by and VOL. XXVII.-April, 1845. 2 G

with the consent of two or more justices, residing in or near the parish, raise weekly, or otherwise, by taxation of the inhabitants and occupiers of property in the parish, competent sums of money for and towards the necessary relief of the lame, impotent, old, blind, and such other among them, being poor, and not able to work." It was, however, early decided by the courts of law, that the justices who were, in this explicit language of the legislature, and for obvious reasons of public policy, required to concur with the churchwardens and overseers, in imposing a poor-rate upon the parish, could not exercise an independent judgment or discretion in the matter, their duty, in this respect, was defined to be, merely ministerial, and not judicial. "The two justices," the Court of King's Bench said, in Rex v. Justices of Dorchester, Strange, 393, "are necessary to sign the rate only by way of form, for it is the churchwardens and overseers that have the power of making it, and whether it be a fair rate or not, is proper for the jurisdiction of the sessions." This decision has been often lamented, and generally received with disapprobation. The absurdity of it was thus forcibly pointed out by a distinguished judge: "It is not easily to be reconciled with any principle of common sense to say, that an act which is merely ministerial, must be done with the consent of two justices. And I much doubt whether the persons who brought in the act of Elizabeth, requiring the consent of two magistrates to the allowance of a poor-rate, intended that the act of allowing it, should be only ministerial, for it seems absurd to require the assent of two justices, and yet not to give them the power of withholding it if they shall see occasion."* The consequence of this decision was to withdraw a salutary and seasonable check upon the increase and

"

*The law, in this respect, has remained the same to the present time, and was not altered by the new Parochial Assessment Act, 6 and 7 Will. IV. c. 96, which passed the legislature in the year 1836. In the case of the Queen v. Lord Yarborough, reported in 3 Per. and D. 491; 12 Adol. and E. 416, Lord Denman, C. J., thus lucidly explains the reasons of this law: Every reader of law, probably, has been surprised at finding that the allowance of a poor-rate by justices is a ministerial act. It seems very extraordinary that they should be called in, and yet not permitted to exercise any judgment in the matter. But this rule has been settled and acquiesced in for a long course of years. The Parochial Assessment Act does not, in terms, get rid of the old law, but certainly uses language somewhat inconsistent with it, in enacting that no rate shall be allowed which is not made upon an estimate of the net value. The justices, in this case, would certainly have brought themselves within the very terms of the first section, if they showed that the rate was not made upon such an estimate; but even then, I cannot believe that the legislature intended to make the allowance of poor-rates other than ministerial, and I think it would be highly inconvenient so to alter the law. In Queen Elizabeth's time, the justices were almost the only persons who could read and write, and there might then have been good reason for appealing to their judgment in such a matter. But now, overseers are, generally speaking, persons of respectable attainments, and may, more safely than in former times, exercise their own judgment in assessing the parish; and the Parochial Assessment Act itself requires them to state, by the declaration, which is a necessary part of the rate, that they have virtually exercised their judgment. There seems," concludes his lordship, "therefore, to be no reason, from the necessity of the case, why the allowance by the justices should not be a ministerial act now, as well as formerly." So also recently, in Reg. v. Lord Godolphin and others, 1 New Sess. Cases, p. 1, it appeared that a poor-rate had been made, and sigued by the overseers only of the parish, the church

accumulation of extravagant and illegal rates in parishes, and to let in very considerable abuses in the administration of the laws for the relief of the poor. For, however irregular, unequal, or partial a rate might be, in fact or in operation, the justices were, nevertheless, compelled by mandamus to allow, and sign it; the remedy of any party who felt himself aggrieved by the rate, was only by appeal to the Quarter Sessions. It is remarkable that no provision was made in the enactment of Elizabeth for giving public or formal notice to the parishioners of the allowance of the poor rates,-the first intimation which they had of their imposition, either collectively or individually, was suddenly when they were called upon by the collector to pay their respective proportions. The want of such publicity tended to facilitate the fraudulent practices of parish officers to such an extent, that, in the preamble to the act of 17 Geo. II., c. 3, which required public notice to be given of the allowance of every rate, it is recited that great "inconveniences arose by reason of the unlimited power of churchwardens and overseers of the poor, who frequently, on frivolous pretences, and for private ends, made unjust and illegal rates in a secret and clandestine manner." To remedy such abuses, and to give greater publicity and notoriety to the parish of the proceedings of their officers, the 1st section of the 17 Geo. II., c. 2, directed that public notice should be given "in the church" of all rates for the relief of the poor, on the Sunday next after they had been allowed by the justices. The courts construed this act strongly against the parish officers, and thereby co-operated with the legislature, in repressing a system of fraud and extensive extortion. The neglect, or omission, to give notice of the rates "in the church," according to the statute, even although the rates had not been appealed against, was decided to be a radical and an incurable defect, which rendered them null and void, and their collection and payment, impracticable and illegal. (Rex v. Newcomb, 4 T. R. 368, and Sibbald v. Roderick, 11 Adol. & Ellis, 38).

At the commencement of the present reign, the publication of poorrates in churches, as prescribed by the 17 Geo. II., to be given, either during or after the performance of divine service, was expressly prohibited, and the 1 Vic., c. 45, directed that in lieu thereof, a written or printed notice should be affixed on or near to the doors of all churches and chapels within such parish or place; and such notice is to have all the legal authority and validity of the former mode and practice of publication. Since the passing of the Act of Victoria, questions, however, have arisen, as to what is to be considered a sufficient compliance with the requirements of this statute-what will, in fact, be a legal and valid publication for all purposes, and, as the decisions which have been given thereon are of great practical importance, it will be desirable here to notice them. In the case of Reg. v. Marriott,

wardens not having been sworn, and the justices refused to allow it on account of its not being signed by a majority of the parish officers, the court awarded a mandamus to the justices, compelling them to sign and allow the rate so made by the overseers, leaving the question as to the formality or validity of the rate open, if objectionable on that ground, to the determination of the Court of Quarter Session on appeal.

4 Per. & D. 440; 12 Adol. & Ellis, 779, it appeared that a parish had several districts in it, each having its own chapel, and separately maintaining its own poor, and altogether unconnected with each other for parish purposes, it was held, that notice on the chapel doors of that district alone for which the poor-rate was made, was sufficient. Lord Denman, C. J., there said "The recent statute merely substitutes a written notice for the oral notice formerly required by 17 Geo. II., c. 3, to be given in the church.' The notice is now to be affixed to the doors of all the churches and chapels within such parish or place. In the place in question, there is one church only, and notice has been given there." But, in a subsequent case of Reg. v. Whipp, 3 Gale & D. 372, the facts were, that there was a church or parochial chapel in a township, which was the only church where poor-rates had ever been published; there were also, in the same township, two other churches of the established church, which had been but recently built, and open for public devotions, and several dissenting places of worship. The court determined that the affixing notice of the rate on the doors of the first-named church or chapel only, was insufficient, and intimated that the rate ought to be quashed. Again, in Reg. v. Roys (1 Roys New Sess. Cases, 456), the most recent case that has been before the courts on this subject, Lord Denman threw out the following important observations: "As to the publication of rates, it is not necessary," said his lordship, "to give a decision in this case; but I should be exceedingly unwilling to narrow the publicity to be given to them; I entertain a doubt whether, under the statute, every place of public worship is not intended. As I said before, it is not necessary to decide that point; but I throw this out to intimate to parish officers my opinion that the fullest means should be adopted to make the publication as general as the statute seems to require." The opinion of Lord Denman, here cautiously expressed, would seem to be unquestionable, and in accordance with the meaning of the statute, and the general policy of the law.

The result of these authorities is, that the notice of a rate must be affixed on or near to the doors of every public place of worship, dissenting, or of the established church, within every parish or place, and that a rate which is not so published is invalid, and wholly unavailable for any purpose.

2. Inspection of Poor-rates.

In connexion with the preceding remarks, it may be useful to notice the statutory provisions which entitle parishioners to an inspection of all rates made for the relief of the poor. The earliest enactment on this subject came into operation contemporaneously with that which required the publication of these rates in the parish church, on the Sunday immediately succeeding their allowance by the magistrates. The object of the legislature in making these important alterations in the system of parochial taxation, was obviously to arm ratepayers with the means of protecting themselves against unjust and illegal rates, and of facilitating the remedy by appeal to the Court of