law as a unit for the purposes of local government and local taxation. Many writers indeed maintain that the parish is simply the vill or township of the Anglo-Saxon period, regarded in its ecclesiastical aspect. In the south of England, at all events, the parish of the nineteenth century is practically identical with the vill or township of the thirteenth. As many townships were too poor to support separate priests, one parish often contained several townships; but it is exceptional and probably a modern innovation for one parish to be contained in two townships (see, however, R. v. Watson, 1868, L. R. 3 Q. B. 762). So closely was religion identified with works of social improvement and charity in the Middle Ages, that the parish with its democratic vestry was the centre of local life in the Middle Ages. Hence when in the later Tudor period the State turned the relief of the poor from a religious into a civil obligation (see articles OVERSEERS; POOR LAW), it selected the parish as the unit for poor-law purposes. The course was followed in subsequent legislation, until the parish became the unit for local government and taxation. When, as in the southern counties, the parish and vill were identical, this made in all respects a good working arrangement. In the northern counties, however, when parishes embraced a number of vills, it was found that the full benefit of the poor law was not reaped, and accordingly in such cases the township was recognised as a unit for which overseers might be appointed by the Relief of the Poor Act, 1662, 14 Chas. II. c. 12.

The almost conclusive proof that a township forms part of a parish is that its inhabitants pay their tithes to the incumbent of the parish and use the parish church for the purpose of being married. The fact that its inhabitants have never been assessed to the church rate nor taken part in the election of churchwardens, and in fact elect their own overseers, does not militate against their claim to form part of the parish (Re Sandbach School and Almshouse Foundation, Attorney-General v. Earl of Crewe, 1901, 2 Ch. 317).

Some places, however, which originally perhaps were waste land or forest, were not comprised in any parish and were known as extraparochial. Some extra-parochial places still exist for ecclesiastical

purposes.

An army station is extra-parochial under the Army Chaplain Act, 1868, 31 & 32 Vict. c. 83, ss. 6 and 7.

In the earlier part of the nineteenth century it was found necessary, owing to the increase of population and the industrial development in parts of the country, to create new divisions of the country for ecclesiastical purposes. At common law there existed, however, no means of dividing a parish, and prior to the Church Building Act, 1818, 58 Geo. III. c. 45, this could not be done by a local or private Act.

Parishes can now, however, be divided for ecclesiastical purposes under the Church Building Acts and the Acts for making new parishes. These Acts in no way affect the old parish for any civil purpose. They fall into three groups.

(1) The Church Building Acts.-These are dealt with in article ECCLESIASTICAL COMMISSIONERS, Vol. V., pp. 45, 46; see also Phillimore, Eccl. Law, vol. ii. pp. 1720 et seq.

(2) The Acts enabling Private Persons to Build Churches or Chapels:1824, 5 Geo. IV. c. 103; 1837, 1 & 2 Will. IV. c. 38; Private Patronage Act, amended by 1837, 1 & 2 Vict. c. 107; 1840, 3 & 4 Vict. c. 60; 1844, 7 & 8 Vict. c. 56; 1848, 11 & 12 Vict. c. 37; 1851, 14 & 15 Vict. c. 97.

(3) The Acts for making new Parishes by the Agency of the Ecclesiastical Commissioners, viz. :-The New Parishes Acts, 1843, 6 & 7 Vict. c. 37; 1844, 7 & 8 Vict. c. 94 (commonly known as the Peel Act); 1856, 19 & 20 Vict. c. 104, s. 3 (commonly known as the Blandford Act). This last Act, with the Acts 19 & 20 Vict. c. 55, 1857; 32 & 33 Vict. c. 94, 1869; and 47 & 48 Vict. c. 565, 1884, to some extent united these classes of Acts. See as to these Acts article ECCLESIASTICAL COMMISSIONERS, Vol. V. p. 47. The London Government Act, 1899, 62 & 63 Vict. c. 14, creates a new kind of ecclesiastical parish. It abolishes the Metropolitan vestries, and enacts that no powers or duties of a vestry which relate to the affairs of the church or church property shall be transferred to the borough councils created under that Act, but provides that a scheme shall be made under the Act to vest such powers and duties in the inhabitants of some parish or ecclesiastical district. The ecclesiastical parishes of the Metropolis affected by this Act have been constituted by schemes made under it.

Chapelries, etc.-The only districts constituted under the first group of these Acts are district chapelries and consolidated chapelries; under the second, particular districts; under the third, the constitution of spiritual districts for ecclesiastical purposes and "new parishes."

District chapelries were first constituted under 59 Geo. III. c. 134, s. 16. (As to the mode of formation, see article ECCLESIASTICAL COMMISSIONERS, Vol. V. p. 48.)

A district chapelry may be constituted from former district chapelries, including an ancient parochial chapelry (Tuckness v. Alexander, 1863, 9 Jur. N. S. 1026). Consolidated chapelries differ from district chapelries in that they are formed out of more than one cure. An existing church may be adopted as the chapel or a new one built. Unless the church is either a vicarage or a rectory, the consolidated chapelry will be a perpetual curacy. See PERPETUAL CURATE.

"Particular districts," "separate districts for spiritual purposes," and "new parishes" are treated under the article ECCLESIASTICAL COMMISSIONERS, Vol. V. pp. 50 and 51.

(As to boundaries of new parishes, see supra, PARISH BOUNDARIES.) Authorities. Stubbs, Select Charters; Const. History, vol. i.; Pollock and Maitland, Hist. Eng. Law; English Local Government, S. and B. Webb; Shaw, Parish Law, 8th ed.; Steer, Parish Law; Burn, Eccl. Law; Phillimore, Eccl. Law, 2nd ed.; History of English Local Government, S. and B. Webb.]

Parish Apprentice.-See APPRENTICE, Vol. I. at p. 434.

Parish Boundaries. The boundaries of a parish, at common law, depend upon ancient and immemorial custom, and must therefore, if any question arise, be determined by the temporal and not by the ecclesiastical Courts, which have no jurisdiction to try a prescription or custom. The means by which the memory of boundaries was retained was by perambulation, or "beating the bounds." The perambulation took place at Rogationtide, and consisted in the parishioners, or the leading men of the parish, headed by the incumbent, making a circuit of the parish, so as to mark the bounds. It was usual to sing the Litany and the 103rd and 104th Psalms on these occasions, and the parishioners were bound to provide banners for the occasion. Injunction 18 of the Injunctions of Elizabeth, while generally forbidding

VOL. X.

19

processions, directs that the people, "for the continuing of the perambulation of the circuit of the parishes, shall once in the year, at the time accustomed, with the curate and the substantial men of the parish, walk about their parishes as they were accustomed, and at their return to church make their common prayer." See also Injunction 19. The course followed in a perambulation, apart from other evidence, will determine the boundary (M'Cannon v. Sinclair, 1859, 28 L. J. M. C. 247). In making the perambulation, parishioners may enter a private house if it is on the boundary line, and may remove obstructions that would prevent this being done (Taylor v. Devey, 1837, 7 Ad. & E. 412). These perambulations still take place in many parishes.

Proper expenses incurred in a perambulation are payable out of the poor-rate, if the perambulation does not take place more than once in three years (7 & 8 Vict. c. 101, s. 60), but no refreshment can be claimed by custom by the parishioners in making it (Welby v. Herbert, 1675, 27 & 28 Car. II. 2 Lev. 163).

If a parish is bounded by a river or a highway, the presumption is that half the soil or half the river belongs to the parish to which it is adjacent; but in the case of a tidal river, if there is nothing to show whether or not the parish extends beyond the line of medium or ordinary high-water mark, the land lying between the boundaries of low and high-water mark must not be presumed to lie within the parish, there being no distinction in this respect between land on the shore of a tidal river and land on the seashore (Bridgwater Trustees v. Bootle-cumLinacre, 2 L. R. Q. B. 4 ; 36 L. J. Q. B. 41). (As to parishes bounded by the sea, it may be stated that prima facie the shore is extra-parochial. See further R. v. Musson, 1858, 27 L. J. M. C. 100, and article on FORESHORE.)

Under the Inclosure Acts, 41 Geo. III. c. 109, and 8 & 9 Vict. c. 118, s. 39, the Commissioners may fix and declare the boundaries of a parish, such boundaries to be published by leaving a description with one of the overseers. See also 3 & 4 Vict. c. 31; 8 & 9 Vict. c. 118; 12 & 13 Vict. c. 83; and 15 & 16 Vict. c. 79. Similar powers are given under the Tithe Acts (1 & 2 Vict. c. 69, s. 2; and see 2 & 3 Vict. c. 62, s. 4). The powers under all these Acts are now exercised by the Board of Agriculture and Fisheries.

Under the Local Government Act, 1888, s. 57, the County Council may by order define the boundary of a parish (see sub-secs. 2 and 3), such order to be confirmed by the Local Government Board and laid before Parliament. If one-sixth of the county electors object to the order, the Local Government Board shall order a local inquiry.

Under the Church Building Acts the boundaries of district parishes are to be marked out, and such boundaries may be altered by Order in Council (58 Geo. III. c. 45, s. 22; 3 & 4 Vict. c. 60, s. 7). The boundaries of district chapelries may also be altered by the Commissioners, with the consent of the bishop, patron, and incumbent (11 & 12 Vict. c. 37, s. 3).

The New Parishes Acts (6 & 7 Vict. c. 37, s. 10; 7 & 8 Vict. c. 96) require the registration of the maps required under the Acts in the diocesan register. It is no longer necessary to register them in Chancery (36 & 37 Vict. c. 9). The boundaries of new parishes may be altered from time to time.

[Authorities. Shaw, Parish Law, 8th ed.; Caldwell, Ecclesiastical Documents; Phillimore, Eccl. Law, 2nd ed.]

Parish Church.-A church is a place dedicated and consecrated to the service of God, and is common to all the inhabitants (Corven's Case, 1611, 12 Rep. 342; see also Fitzwalter's Case, 1493; YearBook, 8 Hen. VII., case No. 4, fol. 12).

The ancient manner of founding a church was for the intending founder first to make application to the bishop and obtain his licence; after which the bishop or his commissioners set up a cross, and set forth the ground where the church was to be built. After this the founder might proceed to the building of it. When the church was finished, it was necessary for the bishop to consecrate it, as until consecration the sacraments could not be administered in it. But the bishop would not consecrate it until it had been endowed. As to the consecration of churches in the Middle Ages, see Constitution of Cardinal Otho, 1236, Athon, p. 7; Constitution of Cardinal Othobon, 1268, Athon, pp. 83, 84.

Accordingly no church or chapel is recognised as such by the law until it has been consecrated. The legal act of consecration is effected by the decree of a competent ecclesiastical Court, that is to say, the act or sentence of consecration, signed by the bishop, setting aside the ground or building in sacros usus. The prayers accompanying the ceremony of consecration are not in English law material to the act (Wood v. Burial Board of Headingley-cum-Burley, [1892] 1 Q. B. 713). There is no legal form of service prescribed for the consecration of churches. A form, however, is in common use, which was drawn up by Convocation in 1712, but never received the royal assent. As to the form, further see Phillimore, Eccl. Law, vol. ii. pp. 1391-1398.

Whether a church could or can be lawfully built without the bishop's sanction, at common law, may be doubtful; but the bishop unquestionably has the power, after a church has been built, to withhold or refuse consecration.

A consecrated church, by the common law, can never be used as a habitation for man, nor can it be let at a rent or pulled down (Ex parte Greenhouse, 1815, 1 Mad. 92; Wright v. Ingle, 1885, 16 Q. B. D. 379; R. v. Twiss, 1869, L. R. 4 Q. B. 407). The canon law, however, permits a church to be pulled down with the consent of the ordinary with a view of building a larger or more beautiful one in its place (Constitutions of Cardinals Otho and Othobon, ante; Warner v. Guter, 1839, 2 Curt. 315; Turner v. Rector of Hanwell, 1842, 1 N. G. C. 368). If the church is rebuilt on a new site it requires reconsecration. Where, under two special Acts which generally incorporated the Lands Clauses Acts of 1845, a railway company was authorised to take lands held in connection with a certain church and an easement or right of using the subsoil under it, including the crypts and foundations, but was prohibited from taking any part of the church, it was held by the Court of Appeal and the House of Lords that there being nothing in the Acts to show that the church should remain permanently in situ, the arbitrator in assessing compensation for severance was at liberty to assume that sometimes the ground in question might cease to be the site of a church, and to use his own discretion as to when that time might arrive (City and South London Railway Company v. United Parish of St. Mary Woolnoth and St. Mary Woolchurch Haw, [1903] 2 K. B. 728; [1905] A. C. 1).

Power to pull down churches was originally given by private Acts. Provision is also made for it under Open Spaces Acts, 1887 and 1890 (50 & 51 Vict. c. 32; 53 & 54 Vict. c. 15). A church cannot be reconsecrated except it be utterly burnt down or destroyed. In the case of

bloodshed in a church, the one exception in which the canon law admits reconsecration, the custom of the English Church has been, and is, to hold a reconciliation service. A reconciliation service is also held when a church which has been long disused is restored to sacred purposes (but see Gibs. Cod., 190).

Some doubt, however, exists whether, if the altar is removed, a reconsecration is not necessary to re-establish ecclesiastical jurisdiction. In Parker v. Leach, 1866, L. R. 1 P. C. 312, the Privy Council held that if a church is substantially rebuilt on the old foundations, there is no need for a reconsecration (see also Bottiscomb v. Ear, 1852, 9 Jur. N. S. 210).

Section 12 of the Consecration of Churchyards Act, 1867, 30 & 31 Vict. c. 133, passed to allay doubts, provides that although the walls of a church are partly demolished, and the "communion table" is removed, a reconsecration or reconciliation is not necessary to the due administration of divine offices, and legalises all marriages, rites, and ceremonies there performed.

Under the Uniformity of Common Prayer Act, 1551-1552, 5 & 6 Edw. vI. c. 1, s. 2, a general duty to attend church is still imposed upon "all and every person inhabiting the realm" who are ordered "to resort to their parish church or chapel accustomed, or, upon reasonable lett therefor, to some usual place where common prayer and such service of God shall be used, etc." This Act, is still, in theory, binding upon members of the Church of England; and therefore no churchwarden has the right to prevent an inhabitant of a parish or district, or apparently a stranger, from entering church to attend divine service, although he considers that he cannot be conveniently accommodated (Taylor v. Timson, 1883, 20 Q. B. D. 671).

A parish church has the parochial rights of christening and burial. Its incumbent is a rector or vicar (see articles RECTOR; VICAR; LAY IMPROPRIATOR), and it is distinguished from a parochial chapelry, or a chapel of ease, and a private chapel.

A charity given for the support of a church cannot be apportioned between that church and another church or chapel of ease built in the same parish under the Church Building Act, 1845, 8 & 9 Vict. c. 70, s. 22 (Re Church Estate Charity, Wandsworth, 1871, L. R. 6 Ch. 296). See articles BURIAL; PARISHIONER.

The freehold of the church is in the rector or vicar. The freehold of the chancel is in the rector (on this subject, further see articles CHANCEL; ECCLESIASTICAL CORPORATIONS; ECCLESIASTICAL COMMISSIONERS; PERPETUAL CURATE). As the freehold of the church is in the incumbent, he has the custody of the key and control of the bells (for cases on this, see article CHURCHWARDEN); but though the freehold of the church is vested in him, he is not liable personally to the local authority in respect of expenses that they may have incurred in removing a part of the church which was a dangerous structure within the meaning of the Metropolitan Building Act, 1855, 18 & 19 Vict. c. 122, ss. 69 to 74.

Churches are exempt from poor-rate under the Poor-Rates Exemption Act, 1833, 3 & 4 Will. iv. c. 30, but this exemption apparently does not apply to churchyards, though in practice they are seldom worth rating (North Manchester Overseers v. Winstanley, 1908, 24 T. L. R. 388, reversing same case in [1907] 1 K. B. 27). Churches are also exempt from assessment on land or buildings under the Metropolis Management Acts (Angell v. Vestry of Paddington, 1868, L. R. 3 Q. B. 714), from new street