It is also observable that this statute (4 Hen. IV.) does not extend to appropriations made before that time. (')

Where the benefice was given, ad mensam monachorum, and so not in the common form, but granted by way of union, and pleno jure; in that case it was served by a monk of their own body, and who was removeable at their own pleasure. The monks, who thus may be said to have been the immortal incumbents, had the cure of souls remaining in them, and the minister employed a mere stipendiary.

curacies,

instituted

From this root sprung the peculiar kind of Origin of stiappropriation, without a vicarage endowed; and pendiary this is the origin of stipendiary curacies, in which who are not the impropriator is bound to provide divine ser- but only vice- but may do it by a curate not instituted, licensed. but only licensed by the bishop, and might reckon himself under no obligation to present a vicar to the bishop for institution, but might provide for the service of the church, as the monks did, by a licensed curate. Since that time, the statutes of dissolution enact, that benefices of every description should be held as they had been held by the dissolved religious houses; a grantee who has obtained what was before held, as above described, ad mensam, pleno et utroque

(1) Britton v. Ward, 2 Rol. Rep. 127.

Second requisite. King's li

cence.

jure, would have the complete incumbency, as intitulatus and beneficiary. If such an impropriator should take orders, he might perform the offices of the church without institution, only by taking the oaths imposed by later statutes. And it would be only the circumstance of not being in orders, that would prevent him from exercising his ecclesiastical rights in full form as those spiritual persons, the monks, did before. But it was not so in ordinary impropriations, in which there had been a vicarage endowed, because the vicar holds by something extrinsic of the impropriator. (')

In order, however, to effect a complete appropriation in addition to the ordination of a perpetual vicar properly endowed, other things were necessary.

Secondly. The king's licence to the spiritual person or body to which the church is to be appropriated must have been obtained, as the interest of the king is concerned in appropriations, all advowsons being held either mediately or immediately from him, and all possibility of presentation, escheat, or lapse, being thereby taken away. (2) And the licence will be void unless it

(1) Per Lord Stowel, in The Duke of Portland v. Bingham, 1 Haggard's R. 166. Gibs. Cod. tit. 30. 750. Seld. c. 6. s. 3.96.

(2) Priddle and Napper's case, 11 Rep. 11. Fitz. N. B. 223. Anon. Poph. Rep. 144. Styles's Rep. 156. 2 Inst. 501. 4 Inst. 191. Godolp. Rep. 198.

be a condition that the vicarage be endowed. (') Hence also the dissolution of a vicarage in a rectory appropriate requires the king's licence; the king's consent also must be matter of record, and indeed he cannot grant such licence without its being matter of record. (2)

The king's licence, however, need not mention that the church is full, and shall be good though there be a new presentation after the licence, before appropriation. (3)

consent.

Thirdly. The consent of the bishop was Third requirequisite, except where the king was patron, and site, bishop's made the appropriation, as he as well as the king may have an interest by lapse, in the presentation of the benefice, which can never happen if it be appropriated to the use of a corporation, which never dies; and the act of appropriation being a thing spiritual, the ordinary hath a spiritual jurisdiction also, because the law reposes a confidence in bishops, that they will not consent to any thing that shall be to the prejudice of the church; however the consent of the bishop might be sufficiently signified by the act of the appropriation, which was the sole act of the bishop, unless when the king made the appropriation, in

Fourth re

tron's con

sent.

which case, as has been observed, the bishop's consent was not required. (')

Fourthly. -Neither the bishop nor the king quisite, pa- could make appropriations without the consent of the patron, he having the fee simple or absolute inheritance of the advowson; his acceptance of the order of the ordinary, and his execution of what he has ordained, is a declaration of his consent, and all will be then intended to be done at his request. (2) But where any other person has an interest in the advowson, then a more express consent is required, without which the parties are not bound by the consent of him who is seised of the inheritance (3)

When the

When the king was patron, an appropriation king patron. made by the king alone is sufficient; as when by his letters patent, he grants the advowson of which he is seised in right of his crown, to a dean and chapter (4); for the authority which the pope exercised in this kingdom being acknowledged by parliament to be in the king, he as supreme ordinary may make an appropriation

() 1 Bl. Com. 385. 1 Rol. Hob. R. 149. Britton V. Abr. 238. Wade, Cro. Jac. R. 517. (3) Gibs. Cod. ch. 13. 752.

(2) 3 Salk. R. 43. Wats. Cl. L. 190. Colt and Glover

v. The Bishop of Coventry,

(4) Ward's case, Poph. R. 145. Wood's Inst. L. E. 37.

of his own authority, without the bishop, when he is patron. (')

The consent of the rector incumbent was Fifth requisite. Incumnecessary when the church was full; hence the bent's conmonks sometimes prevailed on the incumbent to sent. assume their order, and so to bring the church along with him, or they gave him a pension or a corody for his life, on condition of resigning; or if he would not comply then they obtained leave of the patron to appropriate in reversion, or to save the pains of working on the patron, they purchased the perpetual advowson, on purpose to appropriate the benefice. (2)

The most proper time for making an appro- Time of priation is during the vacancy of the benefice, making an appropriwhen the church is void, and it may be executed ation. immediately, as no appropriation can be made of a church which is full, unless in a special manner in apt and express words, to take effect after the death of the incumbent. (3) When such ap propriation is made, the church being full, it is not precisely a grant of the glebe and tithes, but an appointment of a spiritual body to be incumbent when the present incumbent shall die, or

(1) Grendon v. The Bishop | case, 11 Rep. 11. The Recof Lincoln, Plowd. R. 498. tor of Chedington's case, 1 Rep. 155. a. 1 Rol. Abr. 239. Sav. R. 20. Colt v. The Bishop of Coventry, Hob. R. 150.

(2) 1 Rol. Abr. 239. Britton v. Wade, Cro. Jac. 516. 1 Burn's Eccl. L. 69.

(3) Priddle and Napper's

H