a position again, and set the machinery in motion. Seven vestrymen were called for and two church wardens; but care was taken to exclude the rector from a seat, probably owing to the old jealousies of the parson on occount of his former impregnable position. Care was now taken and preserved through many years, that he should not be able to defy the will of the people and stay on. This was accomplished by making him. only an employe, which was attained by excluding him from the vestry whose acts would thus be independent of him, by retaining the purse strings in their own hands, and by making agreements only for short terms. This exclusion of the minister continued till 1790. when by the action of a church convention, held in Easton, it was recommended that "the minister and church wardens be joined with the vestry in transacting church business which may come before them.' The interposition of the minister had been found so far necessary, and he had ceased to be the mere hireling for certain purposes. He was part of the institution. An extract from the records of one parish, St. James', under this date is interesting. The minister entering the vestry, had laid before it the constitution and canons. both of the general convention and also of the church in Maryland for consideration, of which the vestry expressed its hearty approval, save of one feature, that the diocesan constitution restrained the convention from choosing more than one bishop. This the vestry regarded as a mis-take, thinking that one could not serve the whole state. But the trouble was that the convention only purposed to bestow jurisdiction on its

bishops, and for his daily bread he was to provide as he could, by his private fortune or by his salary as a parish minister. Therefore they could have what opinions they might choose. The support of twenty bishops would be no more than the support of one, for that was nothing. Opinions, therefore, were cheap. It will be remembered that in 1814 Maryland did elect a suffragan bishop.

We have seen that the declaration of rights of 1776, recognized the principle that the citizens of the commonwealth might be taxed for the support of religion. In the year 1780, in the hour of her distress, the church remembered this and sought to have her needs provided for by a law framed upon that principle. This was at a meeting of the clergy and laity held in Chestertown when the form of a petition was drawn up to be sent around to the various parishes of the state, that being thus numerously signed it might have the needed weight. The form of the petition was "That an act may be passed agreeably to the aforesaid declaration of rights, for the support of public religion by an equal assessment and laws, and also to enable the vestry and church wardens of this parish by rates on the pews from time to time, or otherwise, as your wisdom shall think fit, to repair and uphold the church and chapel and the church yard and burying ground of the same." Surely a striking instance of the acceptance of a false position, a church born to new and nobler relations, but still in swaddling bands: for the church proposed to leave it to the "wisdom" of the legislators, who were of all creeds as well

as of none, to say what system, if any, she should pursue in raising funds from her children for her support. From the circumstances of the times, when the time, attention and resources of the people were absorbed by the war, this effort was perceived to be hopeless, and so was not prosecuted. Also it may have begun to dawn upon the minds of its favorers as an incongruity that one "society" as even church people called the church at the time, should appeal for a tax upon christians of every name, and also it may have begun to be perceived that a tax at all for religion under the new order of affairs and the broad liberty of the new commonwealth, was out of place. The ground of appeal, however, was not only the maintenance of religion; though church representatives could never ignore that chief consideration; but in their petition the vestries dwelt strongly upon the fact, “That where religion is left to mourn and droop her head, while her sacred ordinances are unsupported, and vice and immorality gain ground, even war itself will be but feebly carried on, patriotism will lose its animating principle, corruption will win its way from the lowest to the highest places, distress will soon pervade every public measure, our graveyards, the monuments of the piety of our ancestors, running to ruin, will become the reproach of their posterity. Nay, more, the great and glorious fabric of public happiness, which we are striving to build. up and cement with an immensity of blood and treasure, might be in danger of tumbling into the dust as wanting the stronger cement of virtue and religion, or perhaps would fall an easy prey

to some haughty invader." To avert such terrible consequences churchmen were asked to petition the legislature for the tax, and from various parts of the state petitions were sent up. And, doubtless, religion was depressed, and immorality in a degree did flourish in consequence; but, fortunately, religion was delivered by a higher and better power than a state tax, with an enfranchisement that was far more noble and enduring. The church flourishes best when she does not look to the assistance, whether willing or unwil ling, of "the sordid and the selfish, the licentious and profane" whom it was hoped by this means to compel. The measure though failing in 1782 was renewed again in 1783, being fostered by the action of Governor Paca who brought the proposition before the assembly. The church regarded the establishment of peace and the assured position of the country among the nations of the earth as a fit occasion for granting state aid. But though so powerfully supported, again the measure came to nothing. Though such longing eyes looked out, and such hopeful hands were in vain extended, yet all of the clergy were not like that brother who in 1784 refused to attend a church convention because it had not been summoned by state authority.

Through all this time the parishes were struggling to sustain themselves; and with sufficient difficulty to please everyone who might have remembered with aversion their abundance in other days. The common recourse was to join several parishes together, with service on different Sundays; an unfortunate necessity wherever it

prevails, as it still does in many places. For either loyalty is wounded in our members going off to other houses of worship on the intervening Sundays, or devotion is cooled by their idling at home. But few have the gace to occupy the day for their spiritual profit in their closets.

Among the parishes that were compelled to have recourse to this means for support was St. James', and by the advice of the vestry we find the rector assuming to his care All Saints, Calvert Co Mr. Magowan, who died in 1784, was at that time performing this double duty, and his successor, the Rev. Dr. Thos. John Claggett, who became rector in 1786, Aug. 1st, gave his care and attention to the same extensive field. This gentleman who, while still rector of St. James in 1792, was elected to the episcopate of Maryland, had previously held various parishes, on all of which he doubtless made a strong impression. For he was a man of marked force of character, and along with his learning, he was exact and business like in his engagements and transactions; one of those men that in a crisis prove of permanent and enduring value to the enterprise in which they are engaged. So as afterwards in diocesan matters, it was now in parochial concerns. Everything was done decently and in order; but besides he was able to enkindle in the parish he occupied for the six years after 1786, a deep interest in all general church affairs, making that parish to be a fair representative of the best parochial life of the day.

He was first chosen for three years, and was afterwards reelected three several times for one year each, probably by his own preference for