the remains of those who were dear to me in life, may be suffered to mingle again with their original elements, undisturbed. I too, sometimes visit the graves of my fathers; and do not love the trouble of referring, on these occasions, to a plan of the ground, or to my pocketbook, to find the spot where each was laid. I remember to have been struck with the neatness and order of a little burial place of the Moravians, at Bristol, to whom I paid a visit in company with my friend Stephen Grellet. An inscription at the head of each grave indicated, in a uniform manner, the initials of the name, and the date of the year. Another at the foot pointed out the extent of the space allotted, as the last lodging place on earth, to each brother or sister; and if I mistake not, each mark was of wood-a sufficient security, methinks, against a perpetuity of monumental fame. Now I own, I think the practice of the Unitas Fratrum, on these occasions, preferable to that perfect levelling of even the little mound with the common surface, which obtains in some places among us. A memorial like this, for the use of those whom it may concern—a mere mark to find the place by, is surely another thing than a monument that bespeaks the attention of every passenger: and if it record facts for the information of posterity, may too commonly be taxed with telling lies also in favour of the deceased. Here lies the great. — False marble where?— Nothing but sordid dust lies there!' I admire not, then, the sweeping Pharisaical ordinance which our book presents on the subject; and yet something must be prescribed and settled by rule; or we shall lie open to the invasions of selfishness and vanity, in this matter, in common with the world at large.—There is a respect due (and for nothing do we stickle more in other cases) from Society to the private judgment and personal feelings of each member. It may be very poetical, but it is not, methinks, just or reasonable to impose alike on all of us the sentiment-Thus let me live unheard, unknown; thus unlamented let me die; steal from the world and not a stone tell where I lie!" Ed. ART. III.-Burying in Woollen enforced: Burial fees. "In the "James Ecroyd son of John Ecroyd died in his childhood, and was interred in his father's family Burying ground, in his orchard at Briercliff, 6th Mo. 4th, 1683." Hereupon arose the following singular case of vexatious intolerance towards the parent. latter end of the 6th Mo. 1683, Richard Whitchelqh, John Hargreaves, and Lawrence Thornber, Wardens, and Richard Swaine, Overseer, took from [me] John Ecroyd of Briercliff, a Kersey Piece and a Stone of Wool, worth £2 10s. (beside other goods returned again) by warrant from Thomas Bredwell called Justice, upon information of Robert Hartley of Burnley called curate, for not making certificate upon oath of my child being buried in Woollen.-Though it was told the said Thomas Bredwell, that information was given to one called a a Minister, called James Hargreaves, unto whom, by right it did belong to receive the same; and also that my child was buried in Woolen. Yet being nothing would satisfy but the oath, and I could in conscience ask none to do it [or swear for me] distress was made as above. John Ecroyd." From the records of Marsden Monthly Meeting: S. Routh. Burial fees: "At Wakefield Sessions the 5th of the 12th Month 1741: On an appeal brought by John Ledger and Sarah Rishton against the Order of Richard Witton and John Burton, Justices, who had granted Charles Zouch, Vicar of Sandal, a warrant of distress against them for Burial fees-with some previous proceedings by John Hill, who with Samuel Armetage and John Willson was appointed by our Monthly Meeting to assist the appellants. "As soon as I was apprised of the nature of the case, that a Warrant of distress, dated Nov. 3rd, 1741, was out against the appellants, I waited on Charles Zouch several times, endeavouring to convince him of the unreasonableness and illegality of his demands; shewing him the precedents, and several Counsel opinions in our favour. But he persisting in his resolution to try the cause, I thought it necessary to give him the following notice which was settled by my Attorney: Take notice that we whose names are underwritten intend to appeal at the next Quarter Sessions of the peace, to be held by adjournment at Wakefield in and for the West Riding of Yorkshire, in the first whole week after Epiphany next, against the order of adjudication and warrant of distress granted against us at thy instance: Given under our hands this 5th day of December of the year 1741, 666 Witness, John Hill. John Ledger, "To Charles Zouch, Vicar of Sandal, and one of His Majesty's Justices of the peace for the County of York."" [Then follows a letter to the prosecutor from John Hill, proposing to him, should he incline to cancel the Warrant, a time and place for meeting before the trial: to which Prosecutor replies in civil terms refusing the request, and alleging morning prayer, and want of time for the meeting: but adds, The demand I make is no more than what hath been all along generally paid, sometimes voluntarily, as I hope to make it appear: and as I think myself obliged in conscience to transmit down to my successors (as far as I lawfully may) the Rights of my Church undiminished, I think I shall be guilty of injustice towards them if I consent to this proposal.' "On receipt of this letter, we who were appointed by our Monthly Meeting to assist the Appellants prepared for tryal; which by reason of other tryals in course before us could not be brought on till about five in the Evening, at the White Hart, where the Court sat by adjournment. The Justices were Richard Witton, Cavendish Nevile, Richard Gilpin Sawrey, and Will. Radcliff: of whom the first, (though he was one who signed the Warrant for Charles Zouch) had heretofore given under his hand, that in such a case as this nothing is due for burial fees. And we being provided by our Friend William Hird with the original paper, put it into his hand just before ye tryal came on who perusing it with some seeming displeasure declared,— as we had done so, he would not meddle in the affair; and accordingly declined acting as Chairman, or giving his judgment at last. We "Our Counsel were John Stanhope and Richard Willson: Charles Zouch chose to plead his own cause. On ye Tryal, ye most material passages were to this purpose, as near as can be recollected by our Counsel on behalf of John Ledger and Sarah Rishton, who are of the people called Quakers and of Wakefield and Dewsbury parish: appeal to this Court against the order of the Justices for making a Levie on theire goods for Burial fees, supposed to be due to Mr. Zouch, Vicar of Sandal, in which parish their deceased friend was laid, but in the Quakers' burial-ground which their own friends hold.' -Charles Zouch: I object against the regularity of the notice given me: it ought to have been in ten days after signing of ye Warrant, but this was longer; also it states the time of the Sessions in the first whole week after the Epiphany which is now past.' Counsel. ‘The act of parliament makes no such restriction, for we have liberty to appeal even after the leaving the warrant: so it is absurd to suppose us restrained to any intermediate time. And as notice was given according to the usual couse of the Sessions (the adjournment being an accidental circumstance) it is sufficient for us, as this is the first sessions after delivery of our notice. But if you will insist upon points we shall reply, and take such advantages as offer on our side: otherwise it is beneath us to aggravate matters, or to dwell upon circumstantial points. We rely upon the merits only, and say that Burial fees in this case are not due by Law.' Charles Zouch: The 1 Geo. 1. directs how the Clergy may receive all that is due to them by Law and custome, and this is due by custome. I take it for all burials in my parish, and I can prove that it hath been generally paide me for such corps as have been laide in the Quakers' Burial-ground.' J Hill ; ' It is not so we deny it. (a) "Counsel. 'Admit what you say to be true, 'tis nothing to us what others have done: ye pointe is what the Law obliges us to do. The Statute gives the power as to Tithes, rates and customary rights, which by Law and custom ought to be paid: but the Vicar here did not duty, (a) Note. To refute what C. Z. says here, and also in his letter, some who had laid their dead in the ground were ready to prove that they never paid him any thing, and upon the strictest enquiry we find that he has only been paid voluntarily by two persons, who are not of our society, and whose friends were buried there by our permission. What he has had besides is very [in]considerable and obtained in a clandestine manner-as from Hannah Booth for three corps; for which he craftily persuaded one Shepard to pay 5s. 6d. for her, which money Shepard stopped of her by mere constraint the first time they reckoned-but our Counsel desired us to wave this point, as it would nothing avail our adversary, and replyed [as above.] and therefore can have no right to the fee. The Law allows no man wages where he doth not work: no custom can be good, that is in itself unreasonable—and so it has been determined in the King's bench time after time. Edward Topsal, parson of St. Botolphs, libelled against Sir John Ferrers, alleging that Sir John wife was buried in another church, yet as she died in his parish there was a burial-fee due to him by custome: whereupon for Sir John Ferrers a prohibition was prayed for by Serjeant Harris; and upon debate it was granted. For this custome (says the record) is against reason, for a man to pay twice for his burial! Again, Bourdeaux, a French protestant had his child baptised at the French church in the Savoy, [Strand] and Doctor Lancaster, vicar of St. Martins, libelled against him for fees; and a prohibition was moved for, and Livins argued it was an Ecclesiastical fee due by the Canon. But Lord Chief Justice Holl replyed, nothing can be due of cominon right, and how can a Canon take money out of a Layman's pocket? Linwood says 'tis simony to take any [thing] for Christning or burying, unless it be a fee due by custom but then a custom for any parson to take a fee for Christening a child, when he does not christen him, is not good-like the case in Hobart, where one dyes in one parish and is buried in another, the parish where he dyed shall not have a burial-fee. If you have a right to christen you should libel for that right, but you should not take money for christning when you do not.' We have also the opinion of several counsel in our favour. Lawyer Gibson, who was Recorder of Lancaster and well known to be a man of sound judgment gave the paper [now put in] under his hand : : “Clerk reads: "First, quere. Whether the Rector or Vicar of any parish hath a Legal right to any fees for marriages, christenings, or burials happening within their respective parishes, unless such Rector, Vicar, or other person authorised by them, actually do perform such service in such kind. Answer: I am of opinion that no fee can be due to the Rector either by canon or custom, for marriages, christenings, or burials, unless he actually performed the service: for the canon cannot subject the Laity to the payment of money, nor can they without performing the service [shew] any ground or consideration to support the custom. Second quere. If any Justices of the peace command before them any of the people called Quakers for refusing to pay the said fees, have they power to grant warrants to distrain for such fees jointly with small tythes, them distinguished from small tythes in the warrant, when such Quakers, after having been examined by the said Justices, and objecting against their proceedings, acquainted them they would not submit to such demands, but on the contrary defend themselves by Law. Answer: I think the justices have a jurisdiction in this matter; and if they err in their judgment by judging that to be due to the Rector, which upon the whole circumstances is not, the parties grieved may appeal to the Quarter Sessions: and if not redressed there may have the matter stated, upon the Session's order for a Certiorari, to the King's Bench. Quere, third, If after such notice given, as above, and distress being made by Justice's warrant, will the same be justifiable and a sufficient authority for the Rector, Vicar, or other officer that executeth such warrant, to distrain for the said fees? If not, what remedy is most proper to be had and used in such a case -(against whom by name shall an action be brought on such distress) and by what way and means and in what manner can it be most readily and effectually obtained? Answer: The justices have a jurisdiction; the Rector and officers will be justified in executing the warrant of distress; and therefore think it most advisable for the parties against whom the judgment is, to appeal to the Quarter-sessions. And if the Justice there incline to affirm the judgment, to get the fact specially stated on the order, particularly, that the Rector or his Curate did not perform the duties for which the fee is demanded, and thereupon to bring a Certiorari and remove it to the Kings' Bench, to have the judgment of that Court. Robt. Gibson 16 Sept. 1740.' Then the Court after a very short pause, seeming to ground chiefly on this that as no duty was done no fee was due, gave it for the appellants, to the general satisfaction of the auditory, town and country. Signed by us who were appointed by our monthly meeting to assist the appellants and attend the tryal, John Hill, Samuel Armetage, John Willson: Wakefield, ye 5th of ye 1st Mo. 1741.” ART. IV.—A Brush for the Mantle: STANZAS returned to the lender with a MS. of The Mantle of Elijaha Jeu-d 'Esprit written under the Post-Pitt administration. Reader! Wouldst know the stuff that made The mantle of the mighty shade Whom Canning's proud to praise ? The warp was good, the weft was nought— By evil days untaught, And splendid failures, dearly bought! The premier's eloquence, like wine, Away, then, minor prophets all! Let Senates mourn his fate, And what is left of sober sense retain. 'Weave truth with trust:' the motto's* good State stuff, thus wove, has ever stiffly stood! The Weaver's. CHARLES ELCOCK, PRINTER, PONTEFRACT. H. |