IMAGE EVALUATION 
 TEST TARGET (MT-S) 
 
 ^^ 
 
 / 
 
 
 ^ ^ 
 
 11° 
 
 1.1 
 
 1^128 |25 
 
 £f 1^0 H2.0 
 
 
 FhotograjM: 
 
 Sciences 
 
 Corporation 
 
 23 WIST MAIN STMET 
 
 WiaSTIR,N.Y. U5M 
 
 (716) •72-4S03 
 
 
CiHM/ICMH 
 
 Microfiche 
 
 Series. 
 
 CIHIVI/ICIVIH 
 Collection de 
 microfiches. 
 
 Canadian Institute for Historical l\Aicroreproductions / Institut canadien de microreproductions historiques 
 
Technical and Bibliographic Notas/Notaa techniques et bibiiographiquee 
 
 Til 
 to 
 
 The Institute has attempted to obtain the best 
 original copy available for filming. Features o^ this 
 copy which may be bibiiographically unique, 
 whicii may alter any of the images in the 
 reproduction, or which may significantly change 
 the usual method of filn ing, are checlted below. 
 
 El 
 
 D 
 
 D 
 
 Coloured covers/ 
 Couverture de couleur 
 
 I I Covers damsged/ 
 
 Couverture endummagie 
 
 Covers restored and/or laminated/ 
 Couverture restaurte at/ou pellicula 
 
 Covnr title missing/ 
 
 Le titre de couverture manque 
 
 Coloured maps/ 
 
 Cartes g^ographiques en couleur 
 
 Coloured inic (i.e. other than blue or black)/ 
 Encre de couleur (i.e. autre que bieue ou noire) 
 
 □ Coloured plates and/or illustrations/ 
 Planches et/ou illustrations en couleur 
 
 □ Bound with other material/ 
 ReilA avec d'autres documents 
 
 D 
 
 Tight binding may cause shadows or distortion 
 along interior margin/ 
 
 La re iiure serr6e peut causer de I'ombre ou de la 
 distortion le long de la marge int^rieure 
 
 Blank leaves added during restoration may 
 appear within the text. Whenever possible, these 
 have been omitted from filming/ 
 II se peut que certaines pages blanches ajouttes 
 lors d'une restauration apparaissent dans le texte, 
 male, lorsque cela 4tait possible, ces pages n'ont 
 pas 6t^ fiim^es. 
 
 Additional comments:/ 
 Commentaires suppl^mentaires; 
 
 L'instltut a microfilm^ le meilleur exempiaire 
 qu'il lui a ^tA possible de se procurer. Les details 
 de cet exempiaire qui sont peut-Atre uniques du 
 point de vue bibiiographique, qui peuvent modifier 
 uno image reproduite, ou qui peuvent exiger one 
 modification dans la methods normale de filmage 
 sont indiquAs ci-dessous. 
 
 n 
 
 D 
 
 
 
 D 
 
 
 n 
 n 
 
 G 
 
 n 
 
 Coloured pages/ 
 Pages de couleur 
 
 Pages damaged/ 
 Pages endommag^es 
 
 Pages restored and/or lam'nated/ 
 Pages restaurtes et/ou pelliculAes 
 
 Pages discoloured, stained or foxed/ 
 Pages dAcolories, tachetAes ou piqutes 
 
 Pages detached/ 
 Pages dAtach6es 
 
 Showthrough/ 
 Transparence 
 
 Quality of print varies/ 
 Cui4lit6 InAgaie de I'lmpression 
 
 Includes supplementary material/ 
 Comprend du materiel suppKmentaire 
 
 Only edition available/ 
 Sttule Mitior disponible 
 
 Pages wholly or partially obscured by errata 
 slips, tissues, etc., have been refiimod to 
 ensure the best possible image/ 
 Les pages totaloment ou partiellement 
 obscurcies par un feuillet d'errata, una pelure, 
 etc., ont At* filmAes k nouveau de fapon A 
 obtenir la meilleure image possible. 
 
 pe 
 of 
 fill 
 
 Oi 
 bs 
 th( 
 
 8i( 
 
 oti 
 fir 
 si< 
 or 
 
 Th 
 sh 
 Til 
 wl 
 
 Mi 
 d.l 
 en 
 be 
 
 rig 
 re( 
 m( 
 
 This item Is filmed at the reduction ratio checked below/ 
 
 Ce document est film* au taux de reduction indiquA ci-dessous. 
 
 10X 14X 18X 22X 
 
 y 
 
 2BX 
 
 30X 
 
 12X 
 
 .16X 
 
 20X 
 
 24X 
 
 28X 
 
 32X 
 
The copy filmed h«ra hat baan raproducad thanks 
 to tha ganarosity of: 
 
 Library of tha Public 
 Archivas of Canada 
 
 L'axamplaira filmA f ut raproduit grAca A la 
 gAnArosit* da: 
 
 iM bibiiothique das Archivas 
 pubiiquas du Canada 
 
 Tha imagas appearing hara ara tha bast quality 
 possibia considaring tha condition and laglbllity 
 of tha original copy ard in kaaping with tha 
 filming contract spacifications. 
 
 Original copias in printad papar ccvars ara fiimad 
 beginning with tha front covar and ending on 
 the last page with a printed or illustrated impres- 
 sion, or the back cover when appropriate. All 
 other original copies are filmed beginning on the 
 first page with a printed or illustrated impres- 
 sion, and ending on the las! page with a printed 
 or illustrsted impression. 
 
 The last recorded frame on each microfiche 
 shall contain the symbol ^^ (meaning "CON- 
 TINUED"), or tha symbol y (meaning "END"), 
 whichever applies. 
 
 Les images suivantes ont AtA reproduites svec le 
 plus grand soin. compta tenu de la condition at 
 da la nattet« de i'exempiaire film*, et en 
 conformity avac las conditions du contrat de 
 filmage. 
 
 Les exemplaires originaux dont ia couverture en 
 papier est imprimAe sent filmte en commenpant 
 par ia premier plat et er terminant soit par ia 
 darnlAre page qui comporte une empreinte 
 d'impression ou d'illustretion. soit par la second 
 plat, salon le cas. Tous ia» autras exemplaires 
 originaux sont fiimAs en commenpent par la 
 pramiire page qui comporte une empreinte 
 d'impression ou d'illustretion et en terminent par 
 la darnlAre page qcii comporte une telle 
 empreinte. 
 
 Un des symboles suivsnts apparattra sur ia 
 darnlAre image de cheque microfiche, selon le 
 cas: la symbols -^ signifie "A SUIVRE", le 
 symbols V signifie "FIN". 
 
 Maps, plates, charts, etc., may be filmed at 
 different reduction ratios. Those too large to be 
 entirely included in one exposure are filmed 
 beginning in the upper left hand corner, left to 
 right and top to bottom, as many frames as 
 required. The following diagrams illustrate the 
 method: 
 
 Les cartes, planches, tableaux, etc., peuvent Atre 
 filmAs A des taux de rAduction diff Arents. 
 Lorsquo le document est trop grand pour Atre 
 reproduit en un seul clichA, il est filmA A p&rtir 
 de I'engle supArieur gauche, de gauche A droite, 
 et de haut en bas, en prenant le nombre 
 d'imagas nAcessaire. Les diagrammas suivants 
 illustrent la mAthoda. 
 
 1 2 3 
 
 1 
 
 2 
 
 3 
 
 4 
 
 5 
 
 6 
 
r.r.^c: 
 
 •< 
 
 I 
 
 \ 1 
 
 t^: 
 
^J<^-' 
 
 
 COKHKSl'O.NDKNri- 
 
 
 / 
 
 
 / 
 
 BISIIOI' 01' \()\ A .SC0T1^\ 
 
 l!l';Vi:i{l',M> (WON (0( llltAN. M. \.. 
 
 A 
 
 I Ml ( 111 ■< .. rnri 
 
 IHS.MISSVI. (tK rili: l.Al'I'I'.l! 
 
 ri!(iM TllK l'*--ri'); ^ I. 1 IIAi:t.K 'iK 
 
 SALKM ('llAiM^L 
 
 HALIFAX. N. S. 
 
 st'f(f\n rniTiny 
 
 HALIFAX. N. S.: 
 LULNTLI) HV MACNAli vV SllAKFi; 
 
 
 ^•y^'; 
 
 M 
 
 .r^-^^ 
 
 i 
 
COrlBESPONDENCE 
 
 ^arWXRM TKH 
 
 BISHOP OF NOVA SCOTIA 
 
 ^KTV TH« 
 
 EEVEREND CANON COCHRAN, M. A., 
 
 TOUCHING THB 
 
 DISMISSAL OF THE LATTER 
 
 FBOM THE PASTORAL OHi:»»« OP 
 
 SALEM CHAPEL, 
 
 HALIFAX, N. S. 
 
 BBGONH X9IIION. 
 
 HALIFAX, N. S. : 
 
 PRINTED BY MACNAB & &HAPEER, 
 
 1866. 
 
POSTSCTvlTT. 
 
 Tho first odition of this " CDrrospondourp," consistinp: 
 of 1,000 oopios, being OKluuistcd. ;in(l anothor of tho sarao 
 extent e.illod for, I uvuil myself of tho opportniiitv to add 
 a fow linos in reply to nn nnprovoked jdhision to my case, 
 which the Editor of tiie Ci'iairh Chronirfc lias; <?one onf. of 
 his way to make, in liis '*• \n<^i dyinu; s])ooeh" contained in 
 the November number of tliat obscure monthly. I had no 
 controversy with him, and he would have done bettor not 
 to have meddled '' in other men's niattei's," nor dealt in 
 sarcastic remarks on the affair between the Bishop and 
 me. The style of those r<emarks is beneath criticism ; 
 their spirit is unbecomiui?; in a Junior clerii;yman when ad- 
 dressing one so much longer in the ministry. Whether I 
 have been '' entirely Avorsted" in my veccnt encounter with 
 the snperior j^owers, and whetlier " every one is either 
 laughing at or commiserating my defeat," I may safely 
 leave to the judgment of the reader, and to the fact of the 
 demand that has called foVth the present edition of the 
 correspondence. As to th(^ iMlitor's taunting allusion to 
 an expression in my brief note to the Bishop of Oct. 24, 
 (page 6) about his providing for the '• prcaddnr/' (only) 
 in Salem, on the two Sundays in tlie month on which, by 
 the new rule, the snrplice was to be worn in the pnlpit (the 
 black gown not being prohibited on the other Sundays, in 
 his LorcUhip's absence) — if the writer liad been candid 
 enough to notice my explanation, on page 8, he would 
 hardly have had the face to pen his second Avitticism about 
 the " smiles" caused by that proposal to his Lordship. 
 
 Moreover, this Editor says that my dismissal was not 
 an Episcopal act, but simply the act of '' any Rector." 
 But if he knew anything about the matter, he must know 
 that it was a disregard of an '' Episcopal" and not a Rec- 
 torial utterance, that was the " head and front of my of- 
 fending."* It may well be questioned, too, whether '' any 
 Rector" ^i; would be borne out in the dismissal of liis Curate 
 on such a pretence, if i^ had not been made a previous 
 condition of their mutual engagement. 
 
 December, 186G. ^ J. C. C. 
 
 ♦ See Bishop's letter, p. 8. 
 
 1 My 
 l|28th' I 
 
 SdiscQ] 
 
COimESPONDENCE. 
 
 To TUB Congregation of Salem Ciiai'el. • * 
 
 My dear fi'iendfi, — In ortler to correct any misapprehen- 
 sions respecting what has hitely occiii;^'ed between tho 
 Bishop ami myself, and to set tho matter in its true light, 
 I have thoiight it best (witli his Lordship's consent), and 
 more especially for your information, to print the entire 
 Correspoiiilence which has led to his dismissal of me from 
 tlie Chapel, in which I have ministered, in connexion with 
 himself, for more than eleven years. 
 
 You will accordingly find it in what follows. «• 
 
 » J. C. COCHRAN. 
 
 THE BISHOP TO MR. COCHRAN. 
 
 Halifax, 28th Sept., 186G. 
 
 My dear Sir, — I enclose $2, which Mr. Dyer requested 
 me to give you for the Deaf and Dumb Asylum, as I am 
 going to Windsor to-morrow, and have not yet had an op- 
 portunity of placing it in your hands. 
 
 I presume that you have understood from my Charge, 
 that the black gown can no longer ho used in 7ny Chapel. 
 It would be very strange, now that its use is prohibited 
 even by the military authorities, if it were to be seen there. 
 
 The Building Committee talk of mortgaging Trinity, but 
 it would be worthless as a security since the pews cannot 
 be let or sold. How the mone}'^ is to be raised I cannot tell. 
 
 Yours truly, 
 
 H. Nova Scotia. 
 
 MR. COCHRAN TO THE BISHOP. 
 
 Halifax, October 2, 1866. 
 
 My Lord, — I have received your Lcrdship's^ note of the 
 j28th Sept., and also the copy of your Lordship's charge, 
 for which I thank you. I notice your observations as to 
 discontinuing the use of the black gown at Salem, and I 
 
trust T need not assure you, that I shall always receive, 
 with due deference, any sugp^estions coming from your 
 Lordship. But I feel certain tliat you have no desire to 
 force upon me anything whicli would do violence to my 
 feelings, o/ be misconstrued by the people to whom 1 min- 
 ister, or be at variance with the custom of the Church, in 
 these Provinces for more than a centur}'. Like the rest of 
 my brethren, I have worn the gown now for more than 
 forty-two years (nearly your Lordship's lifetime), more 
 than eleven of them in " your cliapeV* ; and in the short span 
 of life that may yet be allotted to me, I trust I may be 
 allowed quietly to go on as heretofore, and as most of 
 my brethren in the city and country are still doing. I 
 believe your Lordship is aware, that this does not proceed 
 from a mere aversion to change, but from conscientious 
 scruples, remembering that wearing the surplice in the 
 pulpit, was one of the earliest steps in that movement * 
 which has led so many of our clergy and people to Rome, 
 and is still producing those innovations in the mode of 
 worship in hundreds of our English Churches, which make 
 them hardly distinguishable from Roman Catholic Chapels. 
 I am persuaded that if I were to appear in a surplice in 
 Salem pulpit, it would be most offensive to the congrega- 
 tion, and would cause many to leave the Church. The 
 good rule of the late Archbishop of Canterbury would 
 seem to be best here as in England, namely — " to keep to 
 the gown, where that has been usually worn, or to the 
 other where the people have been accustomed to it" But, 
 without entering into any discussion of the matter, I 
 would simply rest upon that consideration for my personal 
 scruples and feelings, which I trust will be entertained 
 by your Lordship. 
 
 Yours respectfully, 
 
 J. C. Cochran. 
 
 THE BISHOP TO MR. COCHRAN. 
 
 Halifax, October 5, 1866. 
 My dear Sir, — I am sorry to find that you are of the 
 number of those who desire to wear vestments unautho- 
 rized by the Church of England, and I feel much difficulty 
 in replying to your note, for if I sanction the use of the 
 black gown m your case, I cannot prohibit the use of a 
 
colored stole by any one who may think fit to wear it. 
 That the use of the surplice has been regarded as a party 
 badge is a glaring absurdity, for it has always been the 
 only vestment used (since its lirst adoption) in Cathedrals 
 and College Chapels, and mmany of the rwraZ Parishes in 
 England, where a change in the dress of the ofTleiating 
 minister would have been regarded as belonging to the 
 Romisii system rather than to ours. You may, perhaps, 
 not be aware of the fact, that the " ritualists" of the pre- 
 sent day discard the surplice altogether, having substituted 
 a very d liferent vestment under the same name. The ut- 
 most that I can do to meet your wishes is to refrain from 
 any enquiry as to what may be done when / am not pre- 
 sent; for you must perceive that having published my 
 Charge, I cannot, without gross inconsistency, sanction the 
 use of the black gown under any circumstances in my own 
 chapel, and at those times when the communion office is 
 used, whether there is any celebration or not, the sermon 
 must be preached in the surplice^ being a i)art of that office. 
 If you are afraid that it may be regjirded as a badge, you 
 will sufficiently prove that you do not so use it, if you 
 wear the black gown on other occasions. You cannot 
 surely desire to continue the absurd practice of making a 
 SECOND change, which becomes absolutely necessary when 
 the offertory sentences and prayer for the Church militant 
 are to be used, if the sermon has been preached in the 
 gown. I feel that I am placing myself in a false position 
 by even partial compliance with your request, but I am 
 anxious to meet your wishes to the utmost possible extent. 
 
 Yours truly, 
 
 II. Nova Scotia. 
 
 A personal interview followed, in whijh the matter was 
 discussed, and my objections to preach in the surplice 
 were repeated. I asked for more time for consideration, 
 and the Bishop agreed to take the pulpit himself on the 
 following Sunday (October 14), being Sacrament Sunday. 
 On the 21st, when no Communion Service was read, I 
 preached as usual in my gown. On the 23rd I received 
 the following note : — 
 
6 
 
 Halifax, October 23, 186G. 
 
 My dear SiVy — You promised to let me know your inten- 
 tion respecting wearing the Huvplice, us required, at all 
 times of your ministrations. Please to let me know to- 
 morrow (Wednesday), in order that 1 may make my ar- 
 rangements accordingly for Sunday, whether you will 
 undertake to preach in your surplice on Sunday next, and 
 at all times when any portion of the Communion Service 
 is to be used in Salem Chapel, which is, according to my 
 rule, on every second Sunday. 
 
 Yours truly, 
 
 II. Nova Scotia. 
 
 1' 
 
 I- 
 
 IMR.ICOCHRAN TO THE BISHOP. 
 
 Halifax, October 24, 1866. 
 
 tPMy Jjord, — I received your note last evening, and in 
 reply I beg very respectfully to say that I shall be glad if 
 you will kindly provide for the preachi ig at Salem on 
 Sunday morning next, [and on each alternate Sunday, 
 while wo remain there. 
 
 Yours respectfully, 
 
 J. C. Cochran. 
 
 THE BISHOP TO MR. COCHRAN. 
 
 Halifax, October 25, 1866. 
 
 My dear Sir, — I was very much surprised at receiving 
 your note last night, without any answer to the question 
 to which I desired, and to which you had promised to give 
 an answer. At considerable inconvenience to myself, I 
 changed my arrangements for the 14th to meet j'^our 
 wishes, and to give you more time for consideration about 
 a matter which ought not to have caused you a moment's 
 hesitation, and for the consideration of which you had 
 already had abundant opportunity, if time was required. 
 If it had been convenient to me to undertake the duty at 
 Salem, I should not have required your services there, and 
 it is difficult to believe that you can seriously request me 
 to " provide for the preaching " there, while you continue 
 to occupy the position of Minister or Curate, j 
 
 A,U> 
 
ICvcry roasomiblo person will ndrnit that I have already 
 reached the utmost limits of coucession, and I am not 
 quite 8utis(led in my own conscience that I have not ovcr- 
 atepped them. I must therefore request you to let me 
 have a definite unmistakeable answer to my note of Tues- 
 day in the course of to-day (Thursday). 
 
 Yours truly, 
 
 II. Nova Scotia. 
 
 MR. COCHRAN TO THE BISHOP. 
 
 Halifax, Oct. 25th, 186G. 
 
 My Lord, — Having been engaged all the morning, and 
 at the Poor House all the afternoon, I could not answer 
 3'our note until this evening, I did not intend that you 
 should have any difficulty in making out my meaning. I had 
 already, ^otli verbally and by letter, stated my objections 
 to changing the practice of more than forty-two years in 
 my own case, and of centuries in the custom of the Church, 
 and now assuming a different dress in the pulpit, from 
 what I have so long worn, (and in your presence, for ele- 
 ven years) especially, as ncitlier in the rubric nor in your 
 charge is here any command to do so, nor any prohibition 
 to wear the black gown in preaching. Moreover, I stated 
 my belief, that such a change would be offensive to the 
 congregation, and finally, C \t the surplice having been 
 the well known badge of a ;arty in England, which h. 
 largely recruited the ranks of Rome, and is now convert 
 ing our English Churches by the score, into the appearance 
 of R. C. Chapels, — I felt that I could not allow myself to 
 be instrumental in the introduction of what may lead to 
 similar errors in forms and in doctrines, into this Diocese. 
 — I thought you had clearly understood these to be my 
 feelings, and my conscientious scruples, and I had certain- 
 ly hoped, that 3^ou would not have singled me out, for 
 attempted coercion, contrary to my feelings and convic- 
 tions. 
 
 But, if your Lordship desires anything plainer, I beg 
 distinctly to state, that I do not feel that I can properly 
 dssume the surplice in my pulpit ministrations in Salem. 
 When in my last note, I spoke of your providing for the 
 preaching at Salem on the Sundays indicated by you, 1 
 
8 
 
 nl 
 
 I 
 
 U 
 
 had reference to your own expression, that you wished "«a 
 knoio in time make your arrangements" which I sup- 
 posed meant for the supply of the pulpit on those days. — 
 You liave twice charged me with failing in my promise to 
 give an earlier answer. I have never mode such a pro- 
 mise as far as I can remember, but simply told you that I 
 should make up my mind before the Sunday came round. 
 
 Yours respectfully, 
 
 J. C. Cochran. 
 
 I 
 
 
 THE BISHOP TO Mil. COCHRAN. 
 
 Halifax, Oct. 26th, 1866. 
 
 My Dear Sir. — I sincerely regret that all my conces- 
 sions, and my endeavours to satisfy your scruples have 
 been in vain, and that you have finally determined to re- 
 fuse to conduct, in my Chapel^ the service according to the 
 rules of the Church, as they have been, ex cathedra, inter- 
 pretated by me. Of course, therefore, I have now no al- 
 ternative but to dispense with your assistance henceforth, 
 although I do so most reluctantly. 
 
 You are quite right in acting according to your con- 
 science, but you must permit me to observe that I cannot 
 understand the nature of that tenderness of conscience 
 which forbids you to conform to the rules of the Church, 
 enforced by competent authority (with respect to a thing 
 in icseZ/ perfectly indifferent), while you nevertheless desire 
 to retain oflice in that Church. I do not intend to discuss 
 the question of the propriety of one robe rather than ano- 
 ther, it is enough for us that the su plice is appointed, 
 both by the Canon and the "ubric, as the dress of the 
 minister in the ordinary services, and I have publicly given 
 my reasons for attaching importance to strict conformity 
 with the rules of the Church in these days. jSvery one 
 must perceive that if, having made that public statement, I 
 allow in my own Chapel, the use of one kind of unauthorized 
 vestments, I cannot honestly, or without gross injustice, 
 prohil?it the use of others such as some ministers consider 
 themselves bound in conscience to wear. You say that 
 you have worn the gown in my presence for eleven years. 
 This is true, because, although I have always objected to 
 the mummery of changing the dress, more es^ ecially on 
 Communion Sundays, I have allowed it to pass as a harm- 
 
 'J 
 n 
 
 
 K. 
 
 ii 
 
 * 
 
T 
 
 led "ia 
 I sup- 
 ays.— 
 nise to 
 a pro- 
 that I 
 ound. 
 
 RAN. 
 
 866. 
 
 conccs- 
 s have 
 to re- 
 to <ihe 
 inter- 
 no al- 
 ieforth, 
 
 ir con- 
 cannot 
 science 
 Jliurch, 
 a thing 
 i desire 
 discuss 
 m ano- 
 ointed, 
 of the 
 '/ given 
 brmity 
 ry one 
 nent, I 
 lorized 
 ustice, 
 )nsider 
 y that 
 years, 
 ted to 
 My on 
 harm- 
 
 9 
 
 less folly, but since the v'tualists have made it necessary 
 to take up a position, which can ])e rationally and effec- 
 tually maintained against them, the crse is altered ; and 
 it is very strange that you did not immediately after the 
 delivery of the charge, either lay aside the black gown, or 
 notify your inability to contintie to officiate in my chapel. 
 ' You say that I have singled you out for coercion, but 
 you must have so written without consideration, as you 
 are aware that I was willing to make such concessions to 
 yourself personally, as would have saved you from the pos- 
 sibility of incurring any of the suspicions which you so 
 iiuch dread.^ 1 have not given to yuu any diiections more 
 .han I have given to all the Clergy, respecting your pro- 
 ceedings m other places, but I require conformity in my 
 own chapel, from the officiating minister, whoever he may 
 be. Do you suppose that the Rector of St. Paul's or St. 
 George's would permit a Curate or assistant to perform 
 the service in the Church in a manner contrary to their 
 directions ? If they would not do so, how can you expect 
 me to permit the rules, which I have authoritati.ely ex- 
 pounded, to be systematically infringed in a chapol for 
 which I am absolutely and entirely responsible? Being 
 very unwilling to interfere with you, I have passed over 
 without notice several irregularities, of which 1 have heard 
 from time to time. I have heard that you have actually 
 sometimes read the offertory sentences, and the prayer for 
 the Church Militant, in your black gown, but this is such 
 a gross violation of the rules of the Church, that I cannot 
 receive the report as true, without further evidence. 
 
 I have already told you, that the ritualists have gener- 
 ally rejected our surplice, and that as our people are now 
 accustomed to see it worn, under orders from the Horse 
 Guards at the Garrison chapel, there can no longer be any 
 pretext for regarding it as the badge of a parti;. More- 
 over the responsibility rests with me, and not with you; 
 for supposing there was any doubt about the proper vest- 
 ment to be worn, the prayer book provides that — " For 
 the resolution of all doubts concerning the manner how to 
 understand, do, and execute the things contained in this 
 book, the parties that so doubt, or diversely take any- 
 thing, shall always res'^rt to the Bishop of the diocese, 
 who, by his discretion, shall take order for the quieting 
 and appeasing the same. 
 
 You speak, in your note last night, as if I ought to have 
 
10 
 
 understood that you had made up your mind not to com- 
 ply with my injunctions ; but you know that you induced 
 me to take the sermon on the morning of the 14th, and to 
 allow you another week for consideration, on the plea that 
 owing to domestic troubles you had not been able to con- 
 eider the matter sufficiently. 
 
 However, the case is now perfectly clear, and notwith- 
 standing the very great inconvenience to me, I must 
 undertake the duties of Salem so long as I continue to 
 hold it. You will please to deliver the key of the chapel, 
 which I have entrusted to your care, to the bearer of this 
 letter, nnd some one shall attend there at 1 1 o'clock to- 
 morrow morning to enable you to remove anything belong- 
 ing to you. I think there are tioo old surplices belonging 
 to the chapel, and one belonging to yourself. You can 
 send any mone}-^ which you have received since the end of 
 September, with the account at the beginning of next 
 week. If you desire still to retain the charge of the poor 
 connected with the chapel, and will undertake to continue 
 this part of the ivork^ you can retain the balance of collec- 
 tions at the celebration of the Holy Communion, and I 
 will still hand to you for distribution the collections which 
 may be taken on such occasions. 
 
 Again, assuring you that it is with extreme reluctance 
 that I yield to the necessity under which you have placed 
 me, and praying that you may be guided with wisdom 
 from above. 
 
 I remain yours, truly, 
 
 H. I^ovA Scotia. 
 
 I 
 
 MR. COCHRAN TO THE BISHOP. 
 
 Halifax, October 29, 1866. 
 
 My Lord, — I found your letter of the 26th, containing 
 my dismissal from Salem, oii my table, when I returned 
 to my house on that morning, and the key of the church 
 gone, so that I was actually turned out before I knew it. 
 A house-servant generally gets a longer notice when re- 
 quired to quit a master's service. Whether the oldest 
 officiating clergyman in the diocese (with one exception) 
 was entitlisd to as much courtesj', let others judge. I con- 
 sider it a harsh and arbitrary proceeding, thus, by a stroke 
 
11 
 
 oftbepcii, to sever me from my congregation, which I 
 had raised up, and served for more than eleven years, and 
 I hope, not without some success. In reply to your last, 
 let me observe that the grounds of your action are at least 
 questionable. You say that because it is your chapel in 
 which I have been officiating, I must conform to your 
 directions albout the surplice. But is the cha[)el yours ? 
 True your name appears as .the lessee, but the congrega- 
 tion pay the rent, with occasional deficiency indeed, which, 
 however, you regularly call upon the people to make up. 
 Thus it would appear that they, and not your Lordship, 
 have a right to the building for the time being. If so, 
 what you consider j'our strongest ground would vanish. 
 
 Your Lordship has repeatedly spoken of the Canons, 
 rules of the Church, and rubric requiring preaching to be 
 dqjie in the surplice. As to the former, I believe it is 
 generally allowed that they have no force here. If they 
 have I fear your Lordship (;ven would be found breaking 
 some of them. And as to the latter, I can find no rubric 
 touching the matter, from which more than a doubtful 
 inference can be drawn. But if you have such canons, 
 rules, or rubrics, please to let me see them. Again, you 
 dwell mi'^h on the charge of inconsistency to which you 
 would be liable, if you allowed the gown in your own (?) 
 chapel, when j'our Charge is against it. But I can find 
 nothing more than this in that document — "You are 
 aware that the use of the black gown, when you are offici- 
 ating, is as much unauthorized as any of the gorgeous vest- 
 ments lately adopted, but your proper robe, the white 
 linen betokening* the righteousness of the saints, whicli 
 you ought to wear at all times of j^cur ministration, is the 
 emblem of purity," &c. This may be strained into a re- 
 ccmniendation, but certainly is no general order to wear 
 the one robe, or give up the other ; especially as you had 
 just before stated that the custom of the Church for three 
 hundred years ought to be regarded, and it is safe to say 
 that the black gown can plead such custom in its favor, 
 both at home and in America, from its earliest settlement. 
 
 You say too that if you allow the gown to be used in 
 Salem, you cannot honestlj' prohibit the use of other 
 robes, suph as some ministers may consider themselves 
 bound to wear. But surely there is a vast difference be- 
 tween the introduction of new and oflfensive changes — 
 gre6n, blue, red, or white, and the continued use of the 
 
12 
 
 m. 
 
 Hi: 
 
 
 solemn black, worn for centuries past. In allusion to my 
 remark, that I have worn the gown in 3'our presence for 
 more than eleven years, }ou say you have always objected 
 to the mummery of changing the dress from white to black, 
 and call it a harmless folly, but you never objected but 
 once, when some delay arose in the arrival of my gown, 
 and you urged me to assume the surplice, which I promptly 
 declined. And as to the mummery of the business, which 
 you condemn in one place you uphold in another, finding 
 fault with me, because, as you heard, I have on a few 
 occasions, read the sentences in my gown, in order to 
 avoid the said mummery of resuming the surplice. You 
 tell me that I wrote without consideration, when I said 
 3'ou singled me out for coercion. Your Lordship is in 
 error. I repeat the charge, and ask you to name the se- 
 cond clergyman to whom you have applied the screw. 
 
 Your Lordship frequently refers contemptuously to^he 
 *' Ritualists," but I would ask, what is this whole matter 
 about whicli such a stir is made, but " llitualistic." You 
 seem to think that the order from the Horse Guards in 
 March, 1865, to Military Chaplains, and the practice at 
 the Garrison Chapel in reference to the surplice, are con- 
 clusive in favor of your argument ; but it may well be 
 asked what have the Horse Guards to do with Salem 
 Chapel? Or, what should make the Garrison Chapel our 
 rule now, for the white, any more than it was during the 
 incumbency of the late excellent chaplain and his prede- 
 cessor for the black, which they both wore during the fifty 
 years of their united service. As to 3'our reference to the 
 preface in the Prayer Book, which you have rescued from 
 oblivion, and which directs that doubts are to be solved 
 by the Bishop, it must be noted that it only refers to things 
 contained in that Book, and it will not be easy to find sur- 
 plice or gown mentioned among these things. You speak 
 of the " great concessions " you have made to me in this 
 matter. I am aware of none, except that j'ou said you 
 would ask no questions as to what I might wear behind 
 your back, if 1 could only put on the surplice on the Sun- 
 daj's when you might be present — a course which I could 
 not reconcile with Christian simplicity and manliness, and 
 therefore declined to follo^y. 
 
 You frequently assert that the color of the robe is of no 
 consequence in itself. Then why make it so, and stop my 
 ministration of the Word and Sacraments in my accus- 
 
 trl^ 
 
13 
 
 tomefl placo, thus hindering the great work of the salva- 
 tion of souls, and offending numbers of our people. Let 
 me also add here, the ver}' obvious and pertinent question 
 which is asked on all sides. If it is so wrong to wear the 
 gown and preach in it now, why has it been so long al- 
 lowed, and why not banished from St. PulI's, St. George's 
 Dartmouth, and scores of other churches in the diocese ? 
 Nay, it has been asked why did 3'our Lordship wear it, 
 when preaching in St. Paul's on Good Friday? 
 
 But I have done, and heartily wish j'ou had not forced 
 upon me the necessity of this unpleasant coirespondoncc. 
 
 " Seek peace and ensue it," is a precept I would i'ain 
 obey. Upon you. My Lord, rests the heavy responsibility 
 of interrupting ray pastoral connection with my beloved 
 flock and my dear Sabbath School children, and it may 
 be of driving many, old and 3'oung, from the Church we 
 ought to love. I pray God this may not be laid to your 
 charge. I was early trained to reverence for authority,, 
 civil and ecclesiastical, and it is very painful to me to be 
 thus forced by your Lordship into collision with such au- 
 thority. But, painful as it is, my conscience will not 
 rtUow me to be driven to an act, from which consequences 
 may follow, destructive of the purity of the doctrines, and 
 the ordinances of that Reformed branch of the Church of 
 Christ, in which we both are ministers, and whose integ- 
 rity we are so solemnly bound to maintain. In my sixty- 
 ninth year, and the forty-third of my ministr}', I ought to 
 remember that the Day of account is at hand. I am re- 
 solved, God being my helper, that I shall not have to 
 reflect at the last, among my other sins, on being instru- 
 mental in introducing here, what has led in the mother 
 church to such wide-spread " false doctrine, heresy and 
 schism," and is still rending her communion to a fearful 
 extent. 
 
 That the " little cloud " which may be seen in our own 
 ecclesiastical horizon, perhaps just now not bigger than a 
 man's hand, may not be permitted to increase, so as to 
 involve our Colonial Church in similar dangers, is the 
 prayer of , Very respectfully, 
 
 Your Lordship's faithful Presbyter, 
 
 J. C. Cochran, 
 
 P. S. — To set matters in their proper light, and prevent 
 misapprehension, I shall probably issue a Circular to my 
 people, containing our present correspondence. 
 
14 
 
 I had hoped tha^ this would have closed the irksome 
 corrcspondenee, but on the 2nd November I received the 
 followinj:^ long letter, chiefly a repetition of former state- 
 ments already refuted by me. On the " new matter " I feel 
 it necessary to append a few explanatory remarks. 
 
 Li : 
 
 . THE BISHOP TO MR. COCHRAN. 
 
 Halifax, Nov. 1st, 1866. 
 
 Doar Sir, — Having in my letter of the 26th ult. clearly 
 explained my reasons for the step which I most reluctant- 
 ly took, when I determined to forego the convenience of 
 your assistance in my chapel, 1 do not think it necassary 
 to answer at any great length yours of 29th, except so far 
 as it contains or suggests new matter ; but there are some 
 passages in it which cannot be passed over without notice. 
 You complain that you had not sufficient notice that your 
 services would no longer be required in " Salem," but I 
 answer that you were informed, in my letter of the 5th, of 
 my views, of the utmost extent of the concessions which I 
 could make, and of my definite decision respecting the 
 conduct of the services in my chapel. You had therefore, 
 at the least, three weeks, in which to prepare for the inev- 
 (table result, which j'^ou must have contemplated, unless, 
 indeed, j^ou sujjposed that I would be so wavering as to 
 change my mind, after writing the letter, or so weak as to 
 permit you in ony own Chapel to preach when you please, 
 undertaking the burden of making other arrs.ngements for 
 the sermons at other times. 
 
 I have moreover to remind you that j'ou have not been 
 *' suspended" and to call upon you to contradict the false 
 reports that are circulated respecting your present posi- 
 tion, since I have not in any way interfered with your sa- 
 lary or with your action in other places. I have informed 
 you that if you continue to perform the duties outside of 
 the chapel, I will recognize the performance of those acts 
 so that you w^ill receive your salary without any diminu- 
 tion. I have in fact merely said to you what any incum- 
 bent may say in reference to the services in the Churches 
 under his care, that he will not permit any one to officiate 
 in them in a manner of which he disapproves. 
 
 m 
 
15 
 
 With respect to my rights in Salem Chapel which you 
 so strangel}' impugn, you know that I opened, and have 
 kept open, that Chapel, for the benefit of the poor and 
 strangers, entirely on my oivn responsibility, being answer- 
 abie for every expense attending it, (with tlie exception of 
 your salary paid by the English Government,) that instead 
 of an "occasional deiiciency," as stated by you, I have 
 had to pay more or less every year, and that kucIi deficien- 
 cies have not been made up by the people, lint the 
 allegation that a congregation contributing to a voUintary 
 collection at the end of each service, thereby acquire any 
 rights in the building in which they are assembled, is really 
 too absurd to require refutatiqn. 
 
 You ought to be aware that the Canons of 1000 are 
 binding upon the Clergy of the Church of England, and 
 may be enforced at any time, when not repealed by later 
 enactments, at the discretion of the Bishop. You ought 
 to be acquainted with them, but at your request I quote 
 the 67th Canon : " Every Minister saying the public 
 prayers, or ministering the Sacraments, or other rites of 
 the Church, shall wear a comely and decent surplice with 
 sleeves, and if any question arise touching the matter, de- 
 cency, or comeliness thereof, the same shall be decided by 
 the discretion of the Ordinary," i.e., the Bishop.* The 
 rubric for which you ask is immediately before the orders 
 for Morning Prayer in eve^y Prayer Book. Y"ou quote 
 from my Charge, and I cannot imagine a conscientious 
 man requiring any more positive injunction than a notifi- 
 cation that a particular vestmont is unauthorized, and that 
 another is strictly according to rule. 
 
 You have evidently failed to perceive that the *' cus- 
 tom," to which I referred, differs materially from that 
 upon which you reply. Th former is univerml — none of 
 the vestments to which I alluded, except die cope, having 
 been worn in any branch of the Church of England, but 
 there is no such custom in favor of the black gown. If 
 we are members of the Church of England, we must be 
 
 "* Even supposing the Canons to be in force, this one does not 
 touch the point. It says nothing about preaching, which is not a 
 **rite " of the Church. Nobody questions the use of the surplice in 
 other parts of the Service, and the rubric to which the Bishop re- 
 fers is also silent as to the color of the vestments. If we are to 
 bring out those worn in the reign of Edward VI. (A. D., 1550), wo 
 may next be required to appear in green, as some of the Clergy in 
 England do now. — (J.C.C) 
 
16 
 
 i 
 
 giiided by the practice at home, and not by the accidents 
 of a new country ; and the black gown has never baen 
 ■worn there in the model churches (viz. tho cathedrals,) nor 
 in several rural churches, and from early childhood I have 
 seen my Father preach in hin surplice^ when the offertory 
 sentences were to be read after the sermon. 
 
 I perfectly remember the occasion mentioned by you, 
 when, to my great astonishment, you kept the congrega- 
 tion waiting some minutes,* rather than enter the pulpit in 
 your surplice, thus attaching a very exaggerated import- 
 ance to the color or shape of your dress. I am sorry to 
 find, upon further investigation, that not only " on a few 
 occasions," but ordinarily ,t when I v:as not present^ you 
 read the sentences and the following prayer in your black 
 gown, thus violating the custom no less than the rules of 
 the Church. 
 
 I leave to others to judge, after reading my letter of 
 2Gth ult., of the truth of the charge that I have *' singled 
 you out for coercion." You are the minister who hap- 
 pened to be ofTiciating for me in my own chapel, where, as 
 a matter of course, I have required conformity to rule, 
 without reference to a particular person who may at any 
 time be the preacher. 
 
 I thought the meaning of the term *' ritualists," as now 
 commonly used, was understood by every one, although I 
 admit that, strictly speaking, there is " ritualism" in the 
 proceedings of every body of men who, when assembled 
 together, desire to " do all things decently and io order." 
 
 Your remark about the Garrison Chapel is very unfortu- 
 nate for your case, since we actually did adhere >to the 
 black gown as long as the military authorities did so, but 
 since they have disused it, my argument is, that a fortiori 
 it ought to be discarded in the Bishop's Chapel. You 
 have omitted the important zvords of the quotation from the 
 preface of the prayer book, which refers to the Bishop all 
 doubts " concerning the manner how to understand, do, 
 and execute the things contained in the book," and this 
 surely includes the vestments to be worn when doing or 
 cicecw^iwgr these things. 
 
 You have misapprehended my meaning in the conces- ' 
 sions which I made out of deference to your age and 
 scruples. I intended to inform you that when the Com- 
 
 * About half a minute. 
 
 t Misinformed. 
 
17 
 
 munion Sorviro was to be read (twice in each month) the 
 sermon must be preached in the surplice, to avoid needless 
 charpfe, whotiier I might be present or iibscnt, but that 1 
 would absent myself at other times, leaving you to 
 please yourself, although I could not sanction a violation 
 of the rule by my presence. 
 
 I repeat that I attach no importance to the color of the 
 robe (although white is always in Scripture associated 
 with purity and righteousness), but I do attach import- 
 ance to conformity to order, in small things and great. 
 Moreover it should be i derstood that tlie question is not 
 whether ])lack or white shall be assumed., but whether the 
 minister having on a rStiite robe at the beginning of the 
 service, shall afterwards exchange it for black or any other 
 color. The Bishop never changes his robes during the 
 service, whv then should any other minister do so ? 
 
 You speak of " hindering the great work of, the salva- 
 tion of souls," by stopping your ministration in the chapel. 
 Do you really mean that those who may occupy the pulpit 
 in your stead will not carry on the same work ? 
 
 Your next question is fidly answered in my letter, of 
 26th, where I give the reason for enforcing rules formerly 
 dormant, and explained the distinction between m.y own 
 chapel and other churches. 
 
 I am glad to learn that you mean to attend to the pre- 
 cept " seek peace and ensue it," for in that case j'ou will 
 not repeat the singularly offensive proceeding of last Sun- 
 day, to which you were probably urged by bad advisers, 
 and of which 1 hope that you have now repented. Your 
 presence in the most conspicuous seat, robed as you were, 
 could not possibly tend to peace, nor to the promotion of 
 a spirit of devotion in the congregation, whose minds 
 must have been disturbed, whatever their sentiments may 
 have been, respecting yourself. With regard to the few 
 persons wlio offered an insult to their God by coming to 
 the place where prayer is wont to be made, and quitting 
 it without taking part in the worship, or listening to the 
 preaching of His word, I must remind you that such con- 
 duct is utterly without excuse, in apnvate chapel, where, 
 they are invited to come to worship and to hear, without 
 any claim on their part to have such provision made for 
 them. You must surely perceive that, whether their con- 
 duct was instigated by you or not, you are seriously 
 compromised by it ; for they have been long under your 
 
18 
 
 leaching and influence, and if they have not learned how 
 to behave in tlio liouse of prayer, and are irritated by con- 
 formity to the rules of the Cluii'cii, of which tliey arc pro- 
 fessedly members, you cannot have instructed them aright. 
 You profess much anxiety for *' the purity of tlie doctrine 
 and ordinances of the reformed branch of the Church of 
 Christ, of which we both are ministers." All men can 
 judge whether this purity is most likely to be preserved 
 by the strict conformity in all points on which I insist, or 
 by your determination to decide for yourself how far you 
 will conform. 
 
 I do not understand your statement that " the fund 
 owes you £4 or £5." I know of no *' ftind." You have 
 had, for distribution to the sick and needy, the communion 
 alms witJiout accounting to me for the disposal of them. If 
 you have given more I presume that you have given from 
 other sources, or of your own substance, as every Chris- 
 tian does. You have not remitted me the amount of ordi- 
 nary collections received since 31st ult. You are at 
 liberty to publish the correspondence, provided you pub- 
 lish the whole of it, as I desire that what has passed be- 
 tween us may be generally known. 
 
 I am, my dear Sir, 
 
 Yours truly, 
 
 H. Nova Scotia. 
 
 Unwilling to continue the correspondence, I did not re- 
 ply to this last letter, though it afforded sufficient material 
 for remark. But I cannot pass over that portion of it which 
 broadly intimates that I am to be classed with those who 
 have, in his Lordship's opinion, *' offered insult to their 
 God," by leaving the chapel on not seeing me in the pul- 
 pit. If such a charge had come from any other quarter, I 
 should have had no difficulty in designating it as the 
 gravest, the most unprovoked, and the most unjustifiable 
 accusation that one clergyman could invent against another. 
 As it is, I leave it to be answered by those who have known 
 me during my life-long ministry here and elsewhere. On 
 the occasion in question, I certainly did attend in Salem 
 chapel, and in my "black" gown, (not having been de- 
 
 i 
 
 
19 
 
 privo<l of it.; borfiuso T thought I ii\i«j:}it ho allowod to nay 
 my prayers ^ aloiijr with my people, ifl could not ho por- 
 niittod to proaoh to thoni ; and I sat just uhero I thought 
 host. romoinl)orinf; that tlio chapol is froo ovon to thf» 
 poorest outoast. I liavo reason to icnow tliat my proseno(* 
 hnd a more restraininiij inlhienoe on my poo]>le than 
 wonl'l hnve heon produeed hy my ahsonce. As to th<» had 
 teaehin»T with whieh I am ehai'ijji'd, I may atjain safely 
 leave that to the jndfrmont of those who have sat under my 
 ministry, and many ol' whom can testiiy that ! coun- 
 selled qnietn(»ss, and peaee, and order, in the tryincf oir- 
 cnmstances which have heen forced upon them. In refer- 
 ence to certain reports allude<l to in this last letter, as 
 heinp; in circulation, my time as a Minister of Christ would 
 be poorly employed in tracing them to theij- tale-hearinpj 
 authors, who are probably the same that busied themselves 
 in counting:!; the number of times that I did not chan^]:© 
 from the black vestment to the white. 
 
 Perhaps it may be as well to explain the Bishop's allu- 
 sion to n\on€\y matters. Tlie '• fund " means the Sacra- 
 mental collections for the ]ioor and distressed, snvill in 
 amount in proportion to the number of applicants. As \ 
 never turned any one away from my door because I might 
 not have money in hand from that source, I am generally 
 in advence, as at the present time.. For the distribution 
 of these alms, lam accoiintablo to no man. 
 
 But I will close, having now placed in your hands an 
 account of the whole transaction. You v;ill now see that 
 the question is not merely between black and white, but 
 that a great principle is involved, namely, whether I could 
 as a minister of the Reformed Church of England, raise 
 here that flag under whieli so many of her recreant sons, 
 both lay and clerical, have deserted to that very quarter 
 from which our martyred forefathers came out, in the face 
 of persecution, even unto death. Believing, as I consci- 
 entiously do, that from similar beginnings here, Bimilar 
 
 
20 
 
 remits may be found to follow in the course of time, I 
 felt constrained to take my fltondf humbly but firmly, on 
 the right side, and to refuse to lend my aid, however small, 
 to an}' departure (Vom the well-known practice of the 
 Church of England, at home and abioad, for centuries 
 paHt, — and for which departure, I can find neither rubric, 
 rule, or canon, although I have acccHS to the best autliori- 
 ties in such matters. The black gown is not only gene- 
 rally worn in picaoiiing by the parochial clergy in Eng- 
 land, Ireland, Scotland and America, but even in the Ca- 
 thedrals of Quebec, Toronto, ^nd Huron, in Canada. Nay, 
 if I am correctly informed, even the Lord Bishop of New- 
 foundland, certainly not a veiy Low Churchman, ha» used 
 it in some of his preachings, both in that island and in 
 Bermuda. Then why, it may be asked, have such a cru- 
 sade against it here, where it has never committed any 
 otfence that I know of, deserving of banishment, but where 
 its white rival, if I mistake not, will not 1)0 so quietly 
 t-olerated. Hopmg that you will all continue to love, and 
 lo reverence the Church of your fathers, and jealously 
 guard the simplicity and purity of her worship, and above 
 all to grow in grace and the knowledge of your Lord and 
 Saviour, so that we may all meet where jarring opinions 
 and "" vain janglings " will cease, is the fervent prayer of 
 
 Your affectionate Pastor, 
 
 J. C. COCHEAN. 
 
 ybvernbier, 1866. 
 
 ;!1 
 
imo, I 
 ly> on 
 ' smalU 
 of the 
 nturies 
 rubric, 
 Lutliori- 
 ^ gviie- 
 n Eng- 
 the Ca- 
 Nay, 
 ►f New- 
 ka» used 
 
 and in 
 11 aera- 
 ted any 
 it where 
 
 quietly 
 )ve, and 
 ealouBly 
 id above 
 ^ord and 
 opinions 
 jrayer of 
 
 :ran. 
 
 .•V 
 
 IS