should be accountable to the ecclesiastical authority, in the state only to which they should respectively belong; and that the engagement previous to ordination should be a declaration of belief in the holy Scriptures, and a promise of conformity to the doctrines and the worship of the church.

Further, the convention appointed a committee, with various powers; among which, was that of corresponding, during the recess, with the archbishops and bishops of England: and they adjourned, to meet again in Philadelphia, on the 20th of June, in the following year.

After the rising of the convention, their address to the English prelates was forwarded by the committee. to his excellency John Adams, Esq., the American minister; with the request, that it might be delivered by him to his grace the archbishop of Canterbury. There were also forwarded certificates, from the executives of the states in which there was a probability of there being bishops chosen. The executives who gave these certificates were those of New York, Pennsylvania, Maryland, and Virginia. These evidences, agreeably to instructions of the convention, were applied for by the members of that body, from the said states respectively. Mr. Adams willingly performed the service solicited of him; and in a conversation which he held with the archbishop of Canterbury, on the subject of the address, gave such information, and expressed such sentiments, as were calculated to pro, mote the object of it. F.

In the spring of the year 1786, the committee received an answer, signed by the two archbishops and eighteen of the twenty-four bishops of England; acknowledging the receipt of what they were pleased to call the christian and brotherly address of the convention; and declaring their wish to comply with the desire of it; but delaying measures to the effect, until there should be laid before them the alterations which had been made by the convention: it having been represented to the bishops, through private channels, that the alterations were essential deviations from the Church of England, either in doctrine or in discipline.

Not long after the receipt of this letter, the cominittee received another from the archbishops of Canterbury and York, to whom the management of the business had been left by their brethren, after a second meeting of the body; informing, that they had received the edited book of common prayer, in regard to which they declared, that besides their seeing of no occasion for some smaller alterations, which they do not specify; they are dissatisfied with the omission of the Nicene and the Athanasian creeds; and of the descent into hell in the Apostles' creed. And they further declare their disapprobation of an article in the proposed constitution, which seemed to them to subject the future bishops to a trial by the presbyters and the laymen, in the respective states. This, however, does not seem to have been the meaning of the article alluded to; which expresses no more, than that laws for the trial of bishops should be made, not by the general, but by each state ecclesiastical repre

sentative. The prelates went on to inform the committee, that they were likely to obtain an act of parliament, enabling them to consecrate for America. They, however, expected, that before they should proceed under the act, satisfaction should be given in regard to the matters stated. The same communication laid down what would be required, in regard to the characters individually, who should be sent for consecration. As to faith, they were to make the subscription, which the American church had prescribed, to future candidates for orders. On the subject of learning, it was thought disrespectful to the persons to be sent, to subject them to an examination; it being at the same time trusted, that the American church would be aware of the disparagement of the episcopacy, which would be the result of its being conferred on persons not sufficiently respectble, in point of literary qualification. In order to give satisfaction in regard to the religious and moral character of each person to be sent, the archbishops required, that it should be testified by the convention chusing him; and in addition, that there should be a certificate from the general convention, to the effect that they knew no reason, why the person should not be consecrated to the episcopal office. These determinations are given as the result of a consultation of the two archbishops and fifteen of the bishops; being all who were at the time in town. Soon after the letter from the two archbishops, there came one from the archbishop of Canterbury alone, inclosing the act of parliament.

C

After the receipt of the first of the letters of the English prelates, and before the receipt of the second, the general convention assembled, agreeably to appointment, in Philadelphia, on the 20th of June, 1786. The principal business transacted by them, was another address to the English prelates; containing an acknowledgment of their friendly and affectionate letter; a declaration of not intending to depart from the doctrines of the English church; and a determination of making no further alterations, than such as either arose from a change of circumstances, or appeared conducive to union; and a repetition of the prayer for the succession. Before their adjournment, they appointed a committee, with power to reassemble them, if thought expedient, at Wilmington in the state of Delaware.

On the committee's receipt of the second letter, they summoned the convention to meet, at the place appointed, on the 10th of October following. The principal matter which occupied the body when assembled, was the question, how far they should accommodate to the requisitions of the English prelates.

The difficulty concerning the offensive article of the constitution had been done away, before the arrival of the objection of the archbishops. This objection, as already observed, was grounded on a misapprehension of the design of the article. But another objection had been made within the American church, on the score of there being no express provision for the presidency of a bishop in conven

tions and in ecclesiastical trials. This objection had gained so much ground, that, in the session of June, it had been fully satisfied: which had more than done away the ground of the censure of the prelates. The omission of the Nicene creed had been generally regretted; and, accordingly, it was now, without debate or difficulty, restored to the book of Common Prayer; to stand after the Apostles' Creed, with permission of the use of either. The clause in the latter creed, of the descent into hell, occasioned considerable debate; but it was finally restored. The restoration of the Athanasian creed was negatived. The result of the deliberations of the convention, was addressed to the two archbishops, with thanks for their fatherly attention to the church; especially in' procuring legal permission for the conveying of the

succession.

The deputies from the several states were called on, beginning from the northward, for information, whether any persons had been chosen in then respectively, to proceed to England for consecration: when it appeared, that the Rev. Samuel Provoost, D. D. rector of Trinity church in the city of New Fork, had been chosen for that purpose by the convention in that state; that the Rev. William White, D. D. rector of Christ church and St. Peter's in the city of Philadelphia, had been chosen by the convention in Pennsylvania; and that the Rev. David Griffith, D. D. rector of Fairfax parish, Virginia, had been chosen by the convention there. Testimonials in their favour from the conventions in the respect