has its medical officer of health whom it can direct to inspect and report on the sanitary condition of the several burial-grounds within its district. As to the former question, that, namely, of the circumstances under which a local authority is justified in taking action, it will perhaps be best if we give the actual text of the instructions issued by the Local Government Board on August 19. These circumstances fall under two heads (1) Sanitary. (2) General. As to the sanitary considerations the circular says:

'The following may be referred to as circumstances under which it will be incumbent upon the sanitary authority to take action :— 'I. Where in any burial-ground which remains in use there is not proper space for burial, and no other suitable burial-ground has been provided.

2. Where the continuance in use of any burial-ground (notwithstanding there may be such space) is, by reason of its situation in relation to the water supply of the locality, or by reason of any circumstances whatsoever, injurious to the public health.

3. Where, for the protection of the public health, it is expedient to discontinue burials in a particular town, village or place, or within certain limits.'

But there are others also, which the circular thus describes :

:

'There are other circumstances which might render it necessary or expedient that a cemetery should be provided, such as inconvenience of access from the populous parts of the district to the existing burial-ground, or the nature of the site, or the character of the subsoil; and instances may exist where, in deference to the wishes of the inhabitants, it may be expedient to provide, in accordance with the policy of the Burials Acts, a cemetery in which persons of different creeds may be buried with their own religious rites.'

And the circular significantly adds that not only do any of these circumstances justify a local sanitary authority in taking action, but that—

On all or any of the foregoing grounds the authority of the Local Government Board may be invoked, and if the application should prove well founded, a compulsory order would necessarily follow.'

It is therefore plain that the remedy thus provided is as comprehensive in its scope as it is possible for it to be.

Assuming then that a local sanitary authority, either (1)

1 While writing, we observe newspaper statements that the Guardians of the Milton (Kent) Union have taken action under Mr. Marten's Act, and have directed their medical officer to inspect and report as above; and that at the last monthly meeting of the Darlington rural sanitary authority, a Committee was appointed to put the Act in force at once.

voluntarily or (2) under compulsion from head-quarters, is proceeding to supply fresh facilities for interment, what steps is it to take and what are its powers? Here again Mr. Marten's Act is very wide, and empowers the local sanitary authority to acquire, construct, and maintain a cemetery,' and that not necessarily within their own district, since it is of course possible that no suitable site could be found, but ' either wholly or partly within or without their district.' And if works are undertaken outside of their own district their procedure is regulated by Sections 32-34 of the Act of 1875, relating to sewage works, so that three months' public notice must be given before a cemetery is commenced, and in case of objection the Local Government Board's decision is final. Moreover, should the sanitary authority fail to acquire' a satisfactory site by voluntary agreement, it may apply for a provisional order (Sections 175, 176) enabling it to take lands compulsorily. Thus, then, the local sanitary authority is free either to buy an existing cemetery or to form a new one where it may seem best, subject to the very reasonable conditions that if the land be taken outside its own district, an appeal lies to the Local Government Board, or if taken compulsorily, it be under the sanction of a provisional order.

The question of money follows next. How is the cost to be provided for and the money raised? Here, of course, two contingencies have to be considered. The cost may be small compared with the wealth of the district, in which case it may be at once met out of income, i.e. from the rates; or it may be relatively large, and a loan be desirable. In the former case the local sanitary authority is authorised to charge it, in urban districts, upon the general district rate, or whatever other rate is liable for the purposes of the Act of 1875; in rural districts, upon whatever rate is liable for 'general expenses.' If, on the other hand, a loan be necessary for the purchase, preparation, inclosure, &c. &c. of the land for the cemetery, the sanction of the central authority is necessary.

Here, however, an important consideration enters. The 'district' to which the Act applies may be of considerable size; additional facilities for interment may be absolutely necessary for some portion or portions of it, and altogether needless for the rest; a country union, for example (and it is certainly with the rural districts that the Act will be most concerned), may consist of a large number of parishes very differently circumstanced in this respect. Now the clauses referred to of the Act of 1875 enable this class of cases to be dealt with. Under them, cemetery districts may be formed,

consisting of several parishes or parts of parishes, or any particular parish or portion of a parish may be constituted a cemetery district, and then the rates necessary for the formation and maintenance of the cemeteries provided would be levied over the area so provided for. In fact, whatever local arrangement is found to meet the local requirements best, may be adopted.

The foregoing paragraphs may suffice to explain the provisions of the Act respecting the formation of cemeteries and cemetery districts, but the question still remains as to their maintenance and management when formed. So far as pecuniary matters are concerned, it may be enough to say that all necessary expenses of maintenance, &c. are to be provided for in the same way as those of the original acquisition and formation. With respect to their management, &c., under Section 141 of the Public Health Act of 1875, the local sanitary authority can make by-laws regulating the arrangement of graves, the payment of fees and the like; such by-laws requiring the confirmation of the central authority. As to further matters connected with maintenance and management, we are referred to the existing cemetery legislation embodied in the Cemeteries Clauses Act of 1847, which is incorporated into Mr. Marten's Act. The clauses of this Act settle a number of most important questions, as is carefully specified by the explanatory circular of the Local Government Board. First, the local sanitary authority may assign a portion of any such cemetery for burials with the Church Service, and the Diocesan may consecrate such portion on the application of the sanitary authority, and the part so consecrated shall be used only for such burials (Cemetery Clauses Act of 1847, Sect. 23). Next, the sanitary authority must build a chapel within the consecrated portion, and such chapel be approved by the Bishop (see clause 25). And lastly, the sanitary authority shall appoint a salaried chaplain, to be licensed by, and under the jurisdiction of, the Bishop (Sect. 27), the stipend also being such as the Bishop approves (Sect. 30). On the other hand, the sanitary authority may set apart the whole or a portion of the rest of the cemetery for burial of Dissenters, and may allow the ministrations of any recognised Dissenting minister, and may build a chapel for such services (Sections 35 and 36), and all payments under these

1 We are not clear whether these clauses are compulsory. We hope not. For in rural districts far better for the parish church to remain in use, and to carry the body thence to the grave, and for the parish clergyman to be 'chaplain.' But such an adjustment is easy.

heads-as, e.g. the chaplain's stipend-are to be made out of the funds of the sanitary authority derived as already explained.

Such, in a general outline, is the scope of the new Act, and we think that it is not too much to say that it is sufficiently comprehensive and flexible. Every case and every need is provided for. We observe also that the circular from the Local Government Board carefully points out that the Act not only may, but must, be put in force in all cases where the existing burial-grounds are either insufficient for lack of space or unsuitable on any other sanitary ground. The consequence is, that it now rests entirely with local Churchmen to see that the factitious grievance, of which during late years the Liberation Society and Mr. O. Morgan have made so much, be not only swept away, but be visibly and manifestly removed. Surely every Board of Guardians of the Poor should follow in the steps of those of Milton in Kent and of Darlington, and order an immediate inspection of all burialgrounds within their union, and then at once put the Act in force wherever need is found to exist. We do not suppose that this will at once silence the Liberation Society's agitation. That agitation exists only in the towns where the factitious grievance has no existence at all. In the country, where it is alleged to exist, nobody wishes to follow Mr. Morgan in his invasion of the churchyards. So far as inflammatory speech-making and pamphleteering in the great centres of population are concerned, we must expect that for some time longer it will yet continue. But the perfect fairness of the present Act, its equal provision for persons of every religious persuasion, and the ease with which it may be worked, will we trust, be so soon actually felt and experienced as to cut the ground from under any agitation wherever that agitation comes to the test of actual discussion among the well informed. As to the state of our rural churchyards, we may notice that the Bishop of Bath and Wells reports that out of 501 parishes or chapelries with churchyards still in use, the churchyard was either now, or soon would be, over-full in 144 cases; and if this is so in a sparsely-populated diocese like his, we may easily imagine what the case is in the country at large. As to the cost of carrying out the Act, it is surprising how very little it need be. To come to details we may add that one rood of land is adequate for the interment of 1,000 persons, and that the cost of one rood, plus the conveyance, and fencing and gates, need not, since it is rural neighbourhoods that we are considering, exceed 160l. A chapel, which we hope in many cases would be needless, need not cost more than 250l. But there is a special pro

vision empowering the local sanitary authority to receive and hold gifts of land and money for cemetery purposes, so that in many cases, even this very moderate original outlay may hardly be required.

On the whole, then, we feel that if throughout the rural districts Church people are only true to themselves, this Act of Mr. Marten's may prove to have been the turning point in the history of as vexatious a controversy as it has been our lot to be concerned in. It removes the whole question from the atmosphere of polemical controversy; it deals with it upon broad, statesmanlike, and sanitary grounds; it is singularly flexible, and it lends itself with equal readiness to every form in which the need for its application can arise. All that remains is that, where needful, it be promptly applied and brought into action.

ART. IX. THE DOCTRINE OF THE FATHERS ON THE REAL PRESENCE.

The Doctrine of the Real Presence as contained in the Fathers. Notes on a Sermon, 'The Presence of Christ in the Holy Eucharist,' by the Rev. E. B. PUSEY, D.D., Regius Professor of Hebrew; Canon of Christchurch; late Fellow of Oriel College. (Oxford and London, 1879.)

SOME years ago a certain Dr. Harrison attacked Dr. Pusey's work on the Doctrine of the Real Presence. He published two bulky volumes, entitled 'An Answer to Dr. Pusey's Challenge respecting the Doctrine of the Real Presence, in which the doctrines of the Lord's Supper, as held by him, Roman and Greek Catholics, Ritualists, and High Anglo-Catholics, are examined and shown to be contrary to the Holy Scriptures, and to the teaching of the Fathers of the first eight centuries.' We have looked into the work, and find it to be a confused, blundering, acrid, and altogether impossible book. Such as it is, however, it was welcomed with enthusiasm by a certain class. It was extensively reviewed, we are told, in no less than thirty-three periodicals.' The thirty-three editors duly praised it; but, alas! even while in the act of praising it, by some unexplained fatality, they were driven to the same conclusion regarding it as ourselves, viz. that the book is really an impossible book. What a pity! For, if the position taken up by the writer could be sustained, what utter