Engineering Electromagnetics 8th Edition Hayt

Solutions Manual download pdf

https://testbankdeal.com/product/engineering-electromagnetics-8th-
edition-hayt-solutions-manual/

Visit testbankdeal.com today to download the complete set of

test banks or solution manuals!
Here are some recommended products for you. Click the link to
download, or explore more at testbankdeal.com

Engineering Electromagnetics 1st Edition Inan Solutions

Manual

https://testbankdeal.com/product/engineering-electromagnetics-1st-
edition-inan-solutions-manual/

Engineering Electromagnetics and Waves 2nd Edition Inan

Solutions Manual

https://testbankdeal.com/product/engineering-electromagnetics-and-
waves-2nd-edition-inan-solutions-manual/

Fundamentals of Electromagnetics with Engineering

Applications 1st Edition Wentworth Solutions Manual

https://testbankdeal.com/product/fundamentals-of-electromagnetics-
with-engineering-applications-1st-edition-wentworth-solutions-manual/

America The Essential Learning Vol 2 1st Edition Shi Test

Bank

https://testbankdeal.com/product/america-the-essential-learning-
vol-2-1st-edition-shi-test-bank/
New Perspectives Microsoft Office 365 and Access 2016
Introductory 1st Edition Shellman Test Bank

https://testbankdeal.com/product/new-perspectives-microsoft-
office-365-and-access-2016-introductory-1st-edition-shellman-test-
bank/

Fundamentals of Structural Analysis 5th Edition Leet

Solutions Manual

https://testbankdeal.com/product/fundamentals-of-structural-
analysis-5th-edition-leet-solutions-manual/

Social Problems in a Diverse Society 6th Edition Diana

Kendall Test Bank

https://testbankdeal.com/product/social-problems-in-a-diverse-
society-6th-edition-diana-kendall-test-bank/

Financial Managerial Accounting 3rd Edition Horngren

Solutions Manual

https://testbankdeal.com/product/financial-managerial-accounting-3rd-
edition-horngren-solutions-manual/

Business Intelligence and Analytics Systems for Decision

Support 10th Edition Sharda Test Bank

https://testbankdeal.com/product/business-intelligence-and-analytics-
systems-for-decision-support-10th-edition-sharda-test-bank/
Human Resource Management 1st Edition Phillips Solutions
Manual

https://testbankdeal.com/product/human-resource-management-1st-
edition-phillips-solutions-manual/
 CHAPTER 7

7.1a. Find H in cartesian components at P (2, 3, 4) if there is a current filament on the z axis carrying
8 mA in the az direction:
Applying the Biot-Savart Law, we obtain
Z ∞ Z ∞ Z ∞
IdL × aR Idz az × [2ax + 3ay + (4 − z)az ] Idz[2ay − 3ax ]
Ha = 2
= 2 − 8z + 29)3/2
= 2 − 8z + 29)3/2
−∞ 4πR −∞ 4π(z −∞ 4π(z

Using integral tables, this evaluates as

∑ ∏∞
I 2(2z − 8)(2ay − 3ax ) I
Ha = 2 1/2
= (2ay − 3ax )
4π 52(z − 8z + 29) −∞ 26π

Then with I = 8 mA, we finally obtain Ha = −294ax + 196ay µA/m

b. Repeat if the filament is located at x = −1, y = 2: In this case the Biot-Savart integral
becomes
Z ∞ Z ∞
Idz az × [(2 + 1)ax + (3 − 2)ay + (4 − z)az ] Idz[3ay − ax ]
Hb = 2 3/2
= 2 3/2
−∞ 4π(z − 8z + 26) −∞ 4π(z − 8z + 26)

Evaluating as before, we obtain with I = 8 mA:

∑ ∏∞
I 2(2z − 8)(3ay − ax ) I
Hb = 2 1/2
= (3ay − ax ) = −127ax + 382ay µA/m
4π 40(z − 8z + 26) −∞ 20π

c. Find H if both filaments are present: This will be just the sum of the results of parts a and
b, or
HT = Ha + Hb = −421ax + 578ay µA/m
This problem can also be done (somewhat more simply) by using the known result for H from
an infinitely-long wire in cylindrical components, and transforming to cartesian components.
The Biot-Savart method was used here for the sake of illustration.

7.2. A filamentary conductor is formed into an equilateral triangle with sides of length ` carrying
current I. Find the magnetic field intensity at the center of the triangle.
I will work this one from scratch, using the Biot-Savart law. Consider one side of the
triangle, oriented along the z axis, with its end points at z = ±`/2. Then consider a
point, x0 , on the x axis, which would correspond to the center of the triangle, and at
whichpwe want to find H associated with the wire segment. We thus have IdL = Idz az ,
R = z 2 + x20 , and aR = [x0 ax − z az ]/R. The differential magnetic field at x0 is now

IdL × aR Idz az × (x0 ax − z az ) I dz x0 ay

dH = = 2
=
4πR 2 2
4π(x0 + z ) 3/2 4π(x20 + z 2 )3/2

where ay would be normal to the plane of the triangle. The magnetic field at x0 is then
Z `/2 Ø`/2
I dz x0 ay I z ay Ø I` a
H= = p Ø = p y
−`/2 4π(x20 + z 2 )3/2 2
4πx0 x0 + z 2 −`/2 2πx0 `2 + 4x20

105
7.2. (continued). Now, x0 lies at the center of the equilateral
√ triangle, and from the geometry of
◦
the triangle, we find that x0 = (`/2) tan(30 ) = `/(2 3). Substituting this result into the
just-found expression for H leads to H = 3I/(2π`) ay . The contributions from the other two
sides of the triangle effectively multiply the above result by three. The final answer is therefore
Hnet = 9I/(2π`) ay A/m. It is also possible to work this problem (somewhat more easily) by
using Eq. (9), applied to the triangle geometry.

7.3. Two semi-infinite filaments on the z axis lie in the regions −∞ < z < −a (note typographical
error in problem statement) and a < z < ∞. Each carries a current I in the az direction.
a) Calculate H as a function of ρ and φ at z = 0: One way to do this is to use the field from
an infinite line and subtract from it that portion of the field that would arise from the
current segment at −a < z < a, found from the Biot-Savart law. Thus,
Z a
I I dz az × [ρ aρ − z az ]
H= aφ −
2πρ −a 4π[ρ2 + z 2 ]3/2
The integral part simplifies and is evaluated:
Z a Øa
I dz ρ aφ Iρ z Ø Ia
2 2 3/2
= aφ p Ø = p aφ
−a 4π[ρ + z ] 4π ρ2 ρ2 + z 2 −a 2πρ ρ2 + a2
Finally, " #
I a
H= 1− p aφ A/m
2πρ ρ2 + a2

b) What value of a will cause the magnitude of H at ρ = 1, z = 0, to be one-half the value

obtained for an infinite filament? We require
" #
a 1 a 1 √
1− p = ⇒ √ = ⇒ a = 1/ 3
2
ρ +a 2 2 1+a 2 2
ρ=1

7.4. Two circular current loops are centered on the z axis at z = ±h. Each loop has radius a and
carries current I in the aφ direction.
a) Find H on the z axis over the range −h < z < h: As a first step, we find the magnetic
field on the z axis arising from a current loop of radius a, centered at the origin in the
plane z = 0. It carries√a current I in the aφ direction. Using
√ the Biot-Savart law, we have
IdL = Iadφ aφ , R = a2 + z 2 , and aR = (zaz − aaρ )/ a2 + z 2 . The field on the z axis
is then
Z 2π Z 2π
Iadφ aφ × (zaz − aaρ ) Ia2 dφ az a2 I
H= = = az A/m
0 4π(a2 + z 2 )3/2 0 4π(a2 + z 2 )3/2 2(a2 + z 2 )3/2
In obtaining this result, the term involving aφ × zaz = zaρ has integrated to zero, when
taken over the range 0 < φ < 2π. Substitute aρ = ax cos φ + ay sin φ to show this.
We now have two loops, displaced from the x-y plane to z = ±h. The field is now the
superposition of the two loop fields, which we can construct using displaced versions of
the H field we just found:
" #
a2 I 1 1
H= + az A/m
2 [(z − h)2 + a2 ]3/2 [(z + h)2 + a2 ]
3/2

106
7.4 (continued) We can rewrite this in terms of normalized distances, z/a, and h/a:
√ !−3/2 √µ !−3/2 
µ ∂2 ∂2
I z h z h  az A
aH = − +1 + + +1
2 a a a a

Take I = 1 A and plot |H| as a function of z/a if:

b) h = a/4, c) h = a/2:

d) h = a.

Which choice for h gives the most uniform field? From the results, h = a/2 is evidently the
best. This is the Helmholtz coil configuration – in which the spacing is equal to the coil radius.

107
7.5. The parallel filamentary conductors shown in Fig. 8.21 lie in free space. Plot |H| versus
y, −4 < y < 4, along the line x = 0, z = 2: We need an expression for H in cartesian
coordinates. We can start with the known H in cylindrical for an infinite filament along the
z axis: H = I/(2πρ) aφ , which we transform to cartesian to obtain:

−Iy Ix
H= 2 2
ax + ay
2π(x + y ) 2π(x2 + y 2 )

If we now rotate the filament so that it lies along the x axis, with current flowing in positive
x, we obtain the field from the above expression by replacing x with y and y with z:
−Iz Iy
H= 2 2
ay + az
2π(y + z ) 2π(y 2 + z 2 )

Now, with two filaments, displaced from the x axis to lie at y = ±1, and with the current
directions as shown in the figure, we use the previous expression to write
∑ ∏ ∑ ∏
Iz Iz I(y − 1) I(y + 1)
H= − ay + − az
2π[(y + 1)2 + z 2 ] 2π[(y − 1)2 + z 2 ] 2π[(y − 1)2 + z 2 ] 2π[(y + 1)2 + z 2 ]
√
We now evaluate this at z = 2, and find the magnitude ( H · H), resulting in
"µ ∂2 µ ∂2 #1/2
I 2 2 (y − 1) (y + 1)
|H| = 2
− 2 + 2
− 2
2π y + 2y + 5 y − 2y + 5 y − 2y + 5 y + 2y + 5

This function is plotted below

7.6. A disk of radius a lies in the xy plane, with the z axis through its center. Surface charge of
uniform density ρs lies on the disk, which rotates about the z axis at angular velocity Ω rad/s.
Find H at any point on the z axis.
We use the Biot-Savart
p law in the form of Eq. (6), with the following parameters: K =
ρs v = ρs ρΩ aφ , R = z 2 + ρ2 , and aR = (z az − ρ aρ )/R. The differential field at point
z is
Kda × aR ρs ρ Ω aφ × (z az − ρ aρ ) ρs ρ Ω (z aρ + ρ az )
dH = 2
= 2 2 3/2
ρ dρ dφ = ρ dρ dφ
4πR 4π(z + ρ ) 4π(z 2 + ρ2 )3/2

108
7.6. (continued). On integrating the above over φ around a complete circle, the aρ components
cancel from symmetry, leaving us with
Z 2π Z a Z a
ρs ρ Ω ρ az ρs Ω ρ3 az
H(z) = 2 2 3/2
ρ dρ dφ = 2 2 3/2
dρ
0 0 4π(z + ρ ) 0 2(z + ρ )
" #a  ≥ p ¥
2 2 2 /z 2
ρs Ω p z 2
ρs Ω  a + 2z 1 − 1 + a
= z 2 + ρ2 + p az = p  az A/m
2 2
z +ρ 0 2 2z 1 + a2 /z 2

7.7. A filamentary conductor carrying current I in the az direction extends along the entire negative
z axis. At z = 0 it connects to a copper sheet that fills the x > 0, y > 0 quadrant of the xy
plane.
a) Set up the Biot-Savart law and find H everywhere on the z axis (Hint: express aφ in terms
of ax and ay and angle φ in the integral): First, the contribution to the field at z from
the current on the negative z axis will be zero, because the cross product, IdL × aR = 0
for all current elements on the z axis. This leaves the contribution of the current sheet in
the first quadrant. On exiting the origin, current fans out over the first quadrant in the
aρ direction and is uniform at a given radius. The surface current density can therefore
be written as K(ρ) = 2I/(πρ) aρ A/m2 over the region (0 < φ < π/2). The Biot-Savart
law applicable to surface current is written as
Z
K × aR
H= 2
dA
s 4πR
p p
where R = z 2 + ρ2 and aR = (zaz − ρaρ )/ z 2 + ρ2 Substituting these and integrating
over the first quadrant yields the setup:
Z π/2 Z ∞ Z π/2 Z ∞
2I aρ × (zaz − ρaρ ) −Iz aφ
H= ρ dρ dφ = dρ dφ
0 0 4π 2 ρ(z 2 + ρ2 )3/2 0 0 2π 2 (z 2
+ ρ2 )3/2

Following the hint, we now substitute aφ = ay cos φ − ax sin φ, and write:

Z Z Z ∞
−Iz π/2 ∞ (ay cos φ − ax sin φ) Iz dρ
H= 2 2 2 3/2
dρ dφ = 2 (ax − ay )
2π 0 0 (z + ρ ) 2π 0 (z + ρ2 )3/2
2

Iz ρ Ø
Ø∞ I
= 2 (ax − ay ) p Ø = 2 (ax − ay ) A/m
2π z 2 z 2 + ρ2 0 2π z

b) repeat part a, but with the copper sheet occupying the entire xy plane. In this case, the
φ limits are (0 < φ < 2π). The cos φ and sin φ terms would then integrate to zero, so the
answer is just that: H = 0.

109
 7.8. For the finite-length current element on the z axis, as shown in Fig. 8.5, use the Biot-Savart
law to derive Eq. (9) of Sec. 8.1: The Biot-Savart law reads:
Z z2 Z ρ tan α2 Z ρ tan α2
IdL × aR Idzaz × (ρaρ − zaz ) Iρaφ dz
H= = =
z1 4πR2 ρ tan α1 4π(ρ2 + z 2 )3/2 ρ tan α1 4π(ρ2 + z 2 )3/2

The integral is evaluated (using tables) and gives the desired result:
" #
Izaφ Øρ tan α2 I tan α2 tan α1
Ø
H= p Ø = p −p aφ
4πρ ρ2 + z 2 ρ tan α1 4πρ 1 + tan2 α2 1 + tan2 α1
I
= (sin α2 − sin α1 )aφ
4πρ

7.9. A current sheet K = 8ax A/m flows in the region −2 < y < 2 in the plane z = 0. Calculate
H at P (0, 0, 3): Using the Biot-Savart law, we write
Z Z Z 2 Z ∞
K × aR dx dy 8ax × (−xax − yay + 3az )
HP = = dx dy
4πR2 −2 −∞ 4π(x2 + y 2 + 9)3/2

Taking the cross product gives:

Z 2 Z ∞
8(−yaz − 3ay ) dx dy
HP =
−2 −∞ 4π(x2 + y 2 + 9)3/2

We note that the z component is anti-symmetric in y about the origin (odd parity). Since the
limits are symmetric, the integral of the z component over y is zero. We are left with
Z 2 Z ∞ Z 2 Ø∞
−24 ay dx dy 6 x Ø
HP = 2 2 3/2
= − ay p Ø dy
−2 −∞ 4π(x + y + 9) π 2 2 2
−2 (y + 9) x + y + 9 −∞
Z 2 ≥ ¥ Ø2
6 2 12 1 −1 y Ø 4
= − ay 2
dy = − ay tan Ø = − (2)(0.59) ay = −1.50 ay A/m
π −2 y +9 π 3 3 −2 π

7.10. A hollow spherical conducting shell of radius a has filamentary connections made at the top
(r = a, θ = 0) and bottom (r = a, θ = π). A direct current I flows down the upper filament,
down the spherical surface, and out the lower filament. Find H in spherical coordinates (a)
inside and (b) outside the sphere.
Applying Ampere’s circuital law, we use a circular contour, centered on the z axis, and
find that within the sphere, no current is enclosed, and so H = 0 when r < a. The same
contour drawn outside the sphere at any z position will always enclose I amps, flowing
in the negative z direction, and so

I I
H=− aφ = − aφ A/m (r > a)
2πρ 2πr sin θ

110
7.11. An infinite filament on the z axis carries 20π mA in the az direction. Three uniform cylindrical
current sheets are also present: 400 mA/m at ρ = 1 cm, −250 mA/m at ρ = 2 cm, and −300
mA/m at ρ = 3 cm. Calculate Hφ at ρ = 0.5, 1.5, 2.5, and 3.5 cm: We find Hφ at each of the
required radii by applying Ampere’s circuital law to circular paths of those radii; the paths
are centered on the z axis. So, at ρ1 = 0.5 cm:
I
H · dL = 2πρ1 Hφ1 = Iencl = 20π × 10−3 A

Thus
10 × 10−3 10 × 10−3
Hφ1 = = = 2.0 A/m
ρ1 0.5 × 10−2
At ρ = ρ2 = 1.5 cm, we enclose the first of the current cylinders at ρ = 1 cm. Ampere’s law
becomes:
10 + 4.00
2πρ2 Hφ2 = 20π + 2π(10−2 )(400) mA ⇒ Hφ2 = = 933 mA/m
1.5 × 10−2
Following this method, at 2.5 cm:
10 + 4.00 − (2 × 10−2 )(250)
Hφ3 = = 360 mA/m
2.5 × 10−2
and at 3.5 cm,
10 + 4.00 − 5.00 − (3 × 10−2 )(300)
Hφ4 = =0
3.5 × 10−2

7.12. In Fig. 8.22, let the regions 0 < z < 0.3 m and 0.7 < z < 1.0 m be conducting slabs carrying
uniform current densities of 10 A/m2 in opposite directions as shown. The problem asks you
to find H at various positions. Before continuing, we need to know how to find H for this type
of current configuration. The sketch below shows one of the slabs (of thickness D) oriented
with the current coming out of the page. The problem statement implies that both slabs are of
infinite length and width. To find the magnetic field inside a slab, we apply Ampere’s circuital
law to the rectangular path of height d and width w, as shown, since by symmetry, H should
be oriented horizontally. For example, if the sketch below shows the upper slab in Fig. 8.22,
current will be in the positive y direction. Thus H will be in the positive x direction above
the slab midpoint, and will be in the negative x direction below the midpoint.

H out

H out

111
7.12. (continued). In taking the line integral in Ampere’s law, the two vertical path segments will
cancel each other. Ampere’s circuital law for the interior loop becomes
I
Jd
H · dL = 2Hin × w = Iencl = J × w × d ⇒ Hin =
2

The field outside the slab is found similarly, but with the enclosed current now bounded by
the slab thickness, rather than the integration path height:

JD
2Hout × w = J × w × D ⇒ Hout =
2
where Hout is directed from right to left below the slab and from left to right above the slab
(right hand rule). Reverse the current, and the fields, of course, reverse direction. We are now
in a position to solve the problem. Find H at:
a) z = −0.2m: Here the fields from the top and bottom slabs (carrying opposite currents)
will cancel, and so H = 0.
b) z = 0.2m. This point lies within the lower slab above its midpoint. Thus the field will
be oriented in the negative x direction. Referring to Fig. 8.22 and to the sketch on the
previous page, we find that d = 0.1. The total field will be this field plus the contribution
from the upper slab current:

−10(0.1) 10(0.3)
H= ax − ax = −2ax A/m
| 2{z } | 2{z }
lower slab upper slab

c) z = 0.4m: Here the fields from both slabs will add constructively in the negative x
direction:
10(0.3)
H = −2 ax = −3ax A/m
2

d) z = 0.75m: This is in the interior of the upper slab, whose midpoint lies at z = 0.85.
Therefore d = 0.2. Since 0.75 lies below the midpoint, magnetic field from the upper
slab will lie in the negative x direction. The field from the lower slab will be negative
x-directed as well, leading to:

−10(0.2) 10(0.3)
H= ax − ax = −2.5ax A/m
| 2{z } | 2{z }
upper slab lower slab

e) z = 1.2m: This point lies above both slabs, where again fields cancel completely: Thus
H = 0.

112
7.13. A hollow cylindrical shell of radius a is centered on the z axis and carries a uniform surface
current density of Ka aφ .
a) Show that H is not a function of φ or z: Consider this situation as illustrated in Fig.
8.11. There (sec. 8.2) it was stated that the field will be entirely z-directed. We can see
this by applying Ampere’s circuital law to a closed loop path whose orientation we choose
such that current is enclosed by the path. The only way to enclose current is to set up
the loop (which we choose to be rectangular) such that it is oriented with two parallel
opposing segments lying in the z direction; one of these lies inside the cylinder, the other
outside. The other two parallel segments lie in the ρ direction. The loop is now cut by the
current sheet, and if we assume a length of the loop in z of d, then the enclosed current
will be given by Kd A. There will be no φ variation in the field because where we position
the loop around the circumference of the cylinder does not affect the result of Ampere’s
law. If we assume an infinite cylinder length, there will be no z dependence in the field,
since as we lengthen the loop in the z direction, the path length (over which the integral
is taken) increases, but then so does the enclosed current – by the same factor. Thus H
would not change with z. There would also be no change if the loop was simply moved
along the z direction.
b) Show that Hφ and Hρ are everywhere zero. First, if Hφ were to exist, then we should be
able to find a closed loop path that encloses current, in which all or or portion of the path
lies in the φ direction. This we cannot do, and so Hφ must be zero. Another argument is
that when applying the Biot-Savart law, there is no current element that would produce
a φ component. Again, using the Biot-Savart law, we note that radial field components
will be produced by individual current elements, but such components will cancel from
two elements that lie at symmetric distances in z on either side of the observation point.
c) Show that Hz = 0 for ρ > a: Suppose the rectangular loop was drawn such that the
outside z-directed segment is moved further and further away from the cylinder. We
would expect Hz outside to decrease (as the Biot-Savart law would imply) but the same
amount of current is always enclosed no matter how far away the outer segment is. We
therefore must conclude that the field outside is zero.
d) Show that Hz = Ka for ρ < a: With our rectangular path set up as in part a, we have no
path integral contributions from the two radial segments, and no contribution from the
outside z-directed segment. Therefore, Ampere’s circuital law would state that
I
H · dL = Hz d = Iencl = Ka d ⇒ Hz = Ka

where d is the length of the loop in the z direction.

e) A second shell, ρ = b, carries a current Kb aφ . Find H everywhere: For ρ < a we would
have both cylinders contributing, or Hz (ρ < a) = Ka + Kb . Between the cylinders, we are
outside the inner one, so its field will not contribute. Thus Hz (a < ρ < b) = Kb . Outside
(ρ > b) the field will be zero.

113
7.14. A toroid having a cross section of rectangular shape is defined by the following surfaces: the
cylinders ρ = 2 and ρ = 3 cm, and the planes z = 1 and z = 2.5 cm. The toroid carries a
surface current density of −50az A/m on the surface ρ = 3 cm. Find H at the point P (ρ, φ, z):
The construction is similar to that of the toroid of round cross section as done on p.239. Again,
magnetic field exists only inside the toroid cross section, and is given by
Iencl
H= aφ (2 < ρ < 3) cm, (1 < z < 2.5) cm
2πρ
where Iencl is found from the given current density: On the outer radius, the current is

Iouter = −50(2π × 3 × 10−2 ) = −3π A

This current is directed along negative z, which means that the current on the inner radius
(ρ = 2) is directed along positive z. Inner and outer currents have the same magnitude. It is
the inner current that is enclosed by the circular integration path in aφ within the toroid that
is used in Ampere’s law. So Iencl = +3π A. We can now proceed with what is requested:
a) PA (1.5cm, 0, 2cm): The radius, ρ = 1.5 cm, lies outside the cross section, and so HA = 0.
b) PB (2.1cm, 0, 2cm): This point does lie inside the cross section, and the φ and z values do
not matter. We find
Iencl 3aφ
HB = aφ = = 71.4 aφ A/m
2πρ 2(2.1 × 10−2 )

c) PC (2.7cm, π/2, 2cm): again, φ and z values make no difference, so

3aφ
HC = = 55.6 aφ A/m
2(2.7 × 10−2 )

d) PD (3.5cm, π/2, 2cm). This point lies outside the cross section, and so HD = 0.

7.15. Assume that there is a region with cylindrical symmetry in which the conductivity is given by
σ = 1.5e−150ρ kS/m. An electric field of 30 az V/m is present.
a) Find J: Use
J = σE = 45e−150ρ az kA/m2

b) Find the total current crossing the surface ρ < ρ0 , z = 0, all φ:

Z Z Z 2π Z ρ0 Øρ0
2π(45) −150ρ Ø
I= J · dS = 45e−150ρ ρ dρ dφ = 2
e [−150ρ − 1] Ø kA
0 0 (150) 0
£ −150ρ0
§
= 12.6 1 − (1 + 150ρ0 )e A

c) Make use of Ampere’s circuital law to find H: Symmetry suggests that H will be φ-
directed only, and so we consider a circular path of integration, centered on and perpen-
dicular to the z axis. Ampere’s law becomes: 2πρHφ = Iencl , where Iencl is the current
found in part b, except with ρ0 replaced by the variable, ρ. We obtain
2.00 £ §
Hφ = 1 − (1 + 150ρ)e−150ρ A/m
ρ

114
7.16. A current filament carrying I in the −az direction lies along the entire positive z axis. At the
origin, it connects to a conducting sheet that forms the xy plane.
a) Find K in the conducting sheet: The current fans outward radially with uniform surface
current density at a fixed radius. The current density at radius ρ will be the total current,
I, divided by the circumference at radius ρ:

I
K= aρ A/m
2πρ

b) Use Ampere’s circuital law to find H everywhere for z > 0: Circular lines of H are
expected, centered on the z axis – in the −aφ direction. Ampere’s law is set up by
considering a circular path integral taken around the wire at fixed z. The enclosed current
is that which passes through any surface that is bounded by the line integration path:
I
H · dL = 2πρHφ = Iencl

If the surface is that of the disk whose perimeter is the integration path, then the enclosed
current is just I, and the magnetic field becomes

I I
Hφ = − ⇒ H=− aφ A/m
2πρ 2πρ

But the disk surface can be “stretched” so that it forms a balloon shape. Suppose the
“balloon” is a right circular cylinder, with its open top circumference at the path integral
location. The cylinder extends downward, intersecting the surface current in the x-y
plane, with the bottom of the cylinder below the x-y plane. Now, the path integral is
unchanged from before, and the enclosed current is the radial current in the x-y plane
that passes through the side of the cylinder. This current will be I = 2πρ[I/(2πρ)] = I,
as before. So the answer given above for H applies to anywhere in the region z > 0.
c) Find H for z < 0: Consider the same cylinder as in part b, except take the path inte-
gral of H around the bottom circumference (below the x-y plane). The enclosed current
now consists of the filament current that enters through the top, plus the radial current
that exits though the side. The two currents are equal magnitude but opposite in sign.
Therefore, the net enclosed current is zero, and thus H = 0 (z < 0).

115
7.17. A current filament on the z axis carries a current of 7 mA in the az direction, and current
sheets of 0.5 az A/m and −0.2 az A/m are located at ρ = 1 cm and ρ = 0.5 cm, respectively.
Calculate H at:
a) ρ = 0.5 cm: Here, we are either just inside or just outside the first current sheet, so
both we will calculate H for both cases. Just inside, applying Ampere’s circuital law to
a circular path centered on the z axis produces:

7 × 10−3
2πρHφ = 7 × 10−3 ⇒ H(just inside) = aφ = 2.2 × 10−1 aφ A/m
2π(0.5 × 10−2

Just outside the current sheet at .5 cm, Ampere’s law becomes

2πρHφ = 7 × 10−3 − 2π(0.5 × 10−2 )(0.2)

7.2 × 10−4
⇒ H(just outside) = −2
aφ = 2.3 × 10−2 aφ A/m
2π(0.5 × 10 )

b) ρ = 1.5 cm: Here, all three currents are enclosed, so Ampere’s law becomes

2π(1.5 × 10−2 )Hφ = 7 × 10−3 − 6.28 × 10−3 + 2π(10−2 )(0.5)

⇒ H(ρ = 1.5) = 3.4 × 10−1 aφ A/m

c) ρ = 4 cm: Ampere’s law as used in part b applies here, except we replace ρ = 1.5 cm with
ρ = 4 cm on the left hand side. The result is H(ρ = 4) = 1.3 × 10−1 aφ A/m.
d) What current sheet should be located at ρ = 4 cm so that H = 0 for all ρ > 4 cm? We
require that the total enclosed current be zero, and so the net current in the proposed
cylinder at 4 cm must be negative the right hand side of the first equation in part b. This
will be −3.2 × 10−2 , so that the surface current density at 4 cm must be

−3.2 × 10−2
K= az = −1.3 × 10−1 az A/m
2π(4 × 10−2 )

7.18. A wire of 3-mm radius is made up of an inner material (0 < ρ < 2 mm) for which σ = 107
S/m, and an outer material (2mm < ρ < 3mm) for which σ = 4 × 107 S/m. If the wire carries
a total current of 100 mA dc, determine H everywhere as a function of ρ.
Since the materials have different conductivities, the current densities within them will
differ. Electric field, however is constant throughout. The current can be expressed as
£ §
I = π(.002)2 J1 + π[(.003)2 − (.002)2 ]J2 = π (.002)2 σ1 + [(.003)2 − (.002)2 ]σ2 E

Solve for E to obtain

0.1
E= = 1.33 × 10−4 V/m
π[(4 × 10−6 )(107 ) + (9 × 10−6 − 4 × 10−6 )(4 × 107 )]

We next apply Ampere’s circuital law to a circular path of radius ρ, where ρ < 2mm:

σ1 Eρ
2πρHφ1 = πρ2 J1 = πρ2 σ1 E ⇒ Hφ1 = = 663 A/m
2
116
7.18 (continued) . Next, for the region 2mm < ρ < 3mm, Ampere’s law becomes

2πρHφ2 = π[(4 × 10−6 )(107 ) + (ρ2 − 4 × 10−6 )(4 × 107 )]E

8.0 × 10−3
⇒ Hφ2 = 2.7 × 103 ρ − A/m
ρ

Finally, for ρ > 3mm, the field outside is that for a long wire:

I 0.1 1.6 × 10−2

Hφ3 = = = A/m
2πρ 2πρ ρ

7.19. In spherical coordinates, the surface of a solid conducting cone is described by θ = π/4 and a
conducting plane by θ = π/2. Each carries a total current I. The current flows as a surface
current radially inward on the plane to the vertex of the cone, and then flows radially-outward
throughout the cross-section of the conical conductor.
a) Express the surface current density as a function of r: This will be the total current
divided by the circumference of a circle of radius r in the plane, directed toward the
origin:
I
K(r) = − ar A/m2 (θ = π/2)
2πr
b) Express the volume current density inside the cone as a function of r: This will be the
total current divided by the area of the spherical cap subtending angle θ = π/4:
"Z Z #−1
2π π/4
2 0 0 I ar
J(r) = I r sin θ dθ dφ ar = √ A/m2 (0 < θ < π/4)
0 0 2πr2 (1 − 1/ 2)

c) Determine H as a function of r and θ in the region between the cone and the plane: From
symmetry, we expect H to be φ-directed and uniform at constant r and θ. Ampere’s
circuital law can therefore be stated as:
I
I
H · dL = 2πr sin θ Hφ = I ⇒ H = aφ A/m (π/4 < θ < π/2)
2πr sin θ

d) Determine H as a function of r and θ inside the cone: Again, φ-directed H is anticipated,

so we apply Ampere’s law in the following way:
I Z Z 2π Z θ
I ar
H · dL = 2πr sin θ Hφ = J · dS = √ · ar r2 sin θ0 dθ0 dφ
s 0 0 2πr2 (1− 1/ 2)

This becomes Øθ
I Ø
2πr sin θ Hφ = −2π √ cos θ0 Ø
2π(1 − 1/ 2) 0

or ∑ ∏
I (1 − cos θ)
H= √ aφ A/m (0 < θ < π/4)
2πr(1 − 1/ 2) sin θ

As a test of this, note that the inside and outside fields (results of parts c and d) are equal
at the cone surface (θ = π/4) as they must be.

117
7.20. A solid conductor of circular cross-section with a radius of 5 mm has a conductivity that varies
with radius. The conductor is 20 m long and there is a potential difference of 0.1 V dc between
its two ends. Within the conductor, H = 105 ρ2 aφ A/m.
a) Find σ as a function of ρ: Start by finding J from H by taking the curl. With H
φ-directed, and varying with radius only, the curl becomes:

1 d 1 d ° 5 3¢
J=∇×H= (ρHφ ) az = 10 ρ az = 3 × 105 ρ az A/m2
ρ dρ ρ dρ

Then E = 0.1/20 = 0.005 az V/m, which we then use with J = σE to find

J 3 × 105 ρ
σ= = = 6 × 107 ρ S/m
E 0.005

b) What is the resistance between the two ends? The current in the wire is
Z Z a µ ∂
5 5 1 3
I= J · dS = 2π (3 × 10 ρ) ρ dρ = 6π × 10 a = 2π × 105 (0.005)3 = 0.079 A
s 0 3

Finally, R = V0 /I = 0.1/0.079 = 1.3 Ω

118
7.21. A cylindrical wire of radius a is oriented with the z axis down its center line. The wire carries
a non-uniform current down its length of density J = bρ az A/m2 , where b is a constant.
a) What total current flows in the wire? We integrate the current density over the wire
cross-section:
Z Z 2π Z a
2πba3
Itot = J · dS = bρ az · az ρ dρ dφ = A
s 0 0 3

b) find Hin (0 < ρ < a), as a function of ρ: From the symmetry, φ-directed H (= Hφ aφ )
is expected in the interior; this will be constant at a fixed radius, ρ. Apply Ampere’s
circuital law to a circular path of radius ρ inside:
I Z Z 2π Z ρ
2πbρ3
Hin · dL = 2πρHφ,in = J · dS = bρ0 az · az ρ0 dρ0 dφ =
s 0 0 3

So that
bρ2
Hin = aφ A/m (0 < ρ < a)
3

c) find Hout (ρ > a), as a function of ρ Same as part b, except the path integral is taken at
a radius outside the wire:
I Z Z 2π Z a
2πba3
Hout · dL = 2πρHφ,out = J · dS = bρ az · az ρ dρ dφ =
s 0 0 3

So that
ba3
Hout = aφ A/m (ρ > a)
3ρ

d) verify your results of parts b and c by using ∇ × H = J: With a φ component of H only,

varying only with ρ, the curl in cylindrical coordinates reduces to

1 d
J=∇×H= (ρHφ ) az
ρ dρ

Apply this to the inside field to get

µ ∂
1 d bρ3
Jin = az = bρ az
ρ dρ 3

For the outside field, we find

µ ∂
1 d ρba3
Jout = az = 0
ρ dρ 3ρ

as expected.

119
Random documents with unrelated
content Scribd suggests to you:
 “I’m going to make your bed, sir!” cried Marianne, in great good-
humor.
“Very well, then; but don’t let the head be lower than the heels,
my good creature, as you house-maids generally manage it. Slope it
down gently from head to foot, mind you, and....” He stopped a
moment, then smilingly resumed: “Make it as you will, Marianne;
I’m sure it will be first-rate. You see,” he added, turning toward his
hosts when Marianne had left the room, “how this disgusting
egotism crops up incessantly; ... you must try to cure me of it. Oh!
what a rest I’m going to have now,” he exclaimed as he threw
himself on the sofa.... “Madame, dear madame, will you do me a
favor? I know what the pains of exile are by sad experience—pray,
let the cat come in!”
 THE RECENT PROTESTANT EPISCOPAL
CONVENTION AND CONGRESS.
This convention, which met in Boston on the 3d of October and
continued in session for twenty days, was the triennial “Convention
of the Protestant Episcopal Church in the United States of America.”
The bishops sat in a house by themselves and conducted their
proceedings in secret, following in this the precedent of the
Anglican Church as well as the custom of the Roman Catholic
Church in its provincial and plenary councils. The House of Deputies
consisted of one hundred and eighty clergymen and one hundred
and eighty laymen, representing forty-five dioceses, and eight
clergymen and eight laymen representing eight “missionary
jurisdictions.” These sat in public, and a verbatim report of their
proceedings is before us. Among the lay delegates were several
gentlemen of national fame—the Hons. John W. Maynard, of
Pennsylvania; Thomas A. Hendricks, of Indiana, the Democratic
candidate for the Vice-Presidency at the recent election; John W.
Stevenson, of Kentucky; John W. Hunter and L. Bradford Prince, of
Long Island; Gen. C. C. Augur, U. S. Army; Daniel R. Magruder and
Montgomery Blair, of Maryland; Robert C. Winthrop, of
Massachusetts; General J. H. Simpson, U. S. Army; Hamilton Fish,
Cambridge Livingston, and W. A. Davies, of New York; Morrison R.
Waite, of Ohio; and Geo. W. Thompson and Richard Parker, of
Virginia. It is not probable that any of the other sects could marshal
laymen like these to sit in its councils. We mention their names
because the list affords some explanation of the fact that the social
and political influence of the Protestant Episcopalians is vastly out
of proportion to their numerical strength. At a preliminary session,
the bishops and deputies being together, Dr. Williams, the Bishop of
Connecticut, preached a sermon in which he introduced a subject
that subsequently occupied much of the attention of the convention
—“the most threatening social evil of our time, the growing lack of
sympathy between different classes and individuals of such classes.”
“To-day,” he said, “we see great chasms opening everywhere
because of this, which threatens church and state alike with sad
disaster.” And he added:
“I think those chasms are more entirely unrelieved and ghastly in this
country than in almost any other. I know that we have not been wont so
to think or speak, and I know that to say this involves some chance of
incurring severe displeasure; but I fully believe it to be true. In most
lands there are things—I speak of things outside of Christian sympathies
and labors—that somewhat bridge over these threatening severances.
There are ancient memories; ancestral offices and ministries that in
their long continuance have almost become binding laws; relations, long
enduring, of patronage and clientship; and many other things besides.
With us—we may as well face the fact—those things have, for the most
part, no existence. The one only helping thing we have—still apart from
what was just alluded to—is political equality. And how much virtue has
that shown itself to have in pressing exigencies and emergencies?
When, all at once, in the late summer months, that yawning chasm
opened at our feet which appeared to threaten nearly everything in
ordinary life, how little there seemed to be to turn to! There stood on
either side contending forces in apparently irreconcilable opposition, and
everywhere we heard the cry about rights! rights! rights! till nothing
else was heard. If some few voices dared to speak of duties they were
lost in the angry clamor. And yet those voices must be heard. Those
words about duty on the one side and the other must be listened to, if
ever we are to have more than an armed truce between these parties—
a truce which may at any time burst out into desolating strife.”

Dr. Williams’ remedy was, of course, that the Protestant

Episcopalians should teach the people their duties. To do this,
however, they must first get the hearing of the people. But this is
just what they have failed to get, and will always fail in getting—
certainly so long as they provide fine churches with eloquent
preachers for the rich, and a very different order of preachers and
churches for the poor. The Catholic Church, before whose altars all
distinctions of earthly rank and position disappear, can and does
teach the people what their duties are, and she does it with effect,
since her priests speak with authority and by virtue of an
incontestably divine commission—two things quite unknown among
the sects. This is what Rev. Hugh Thompson felt and acknowledged
when, in the Episcopal Church Congress held in this city, he said:
“What is the worth of a church in this world except as a moral teacher
—except this: to get the Ten Commandments kept on earth? The church
canons are usually busy with questions affecting garments, gestures,
postures, and the orthodoxy of the Prayer-Book, but rarely do we find
any moral legislation. There are plenty of instructions to the clergy and
bishops, and we are led to think what a wicked lot of people these
clergy and bishops must be to need all these laws, and what a good and
pious laity we must have when they have no need of such legislation!
The church gives no real expression of opinion on the complicated
questions of marriage, so that one minister may bless a union while
another would not do so under any circumstances. Is it right that the
church should evade such responsibilities as these? The church must
place itself plainly on record. The church must be to a millionaire and
beggar the same, must demand equal justice for all—for the railway
president and the railway brakeman, for the worshipper in the gilded
temple and in the ordinary meeting-house. Such a church, with the
courage and fearlessness and ability to tell and enforce the eternal
truth, without fear or favor, is what this country is waiting for, and would
have an influence here unequalled since the days of Athanasius.”

The first two days of the convention were spent chiefly in rather
unseemly discussions upon a proposition to print fifteen hundred
copies of Dr. Williams’ sermon, to appoint a committee “to consider
the importance of the practical principles enunciated in it,” and in
attempts to begin a debate upon three amendments to the
constitution proposed three years ago by the last convention. Much
interest was excited by some remarks by the Rev. Dr. Harwood, of
Connecticut, who thought that one of the most pressing duties of
the convention would be the invention of a method whereby
clergymen who had grown tired of their work might be retired
without incurring disgrace. It is curious to observe how the Catholic
doctrine, “once a priest always a priest,” still lingers among the laity
of this Protestant body, while its clergymen, or some of them, seem
anxious to destroy it. Dr. Harwood complained that although at
present the regulations of his church permitted any clergyman to
“withdraw from the ministry for causes not affecting his moral
character,” nevertheless “somewhat of a stigma rests upon the man,
and people may even point to his children and say, ‘There go the
children of a disgraced clergyman.’” This state of things was found
to be “a grievous burden”; for there were numbers of good fellows
who feel that “they are out of place in the ministry of the Protestant
Episcopal Church,” and who still continue in that service because
they fear to incur disgrace by leaving it. Dr. Harwood drew a pitiful
picture of the condition of these unhappy persons: “They may have
changed their minds about some doctrine; they may believe too
much or too little; they may be drifting towards a blank unbelief or
towards a wretched superstition; they may feel that they have
mistaken their calling and cannot do their work, for neither their
hearts nor their minds are in it.” We agree with Dr. Harwood that
his church would be better off without such parsons; and it is sad
to record that his proposition, looking towards the adoption of a
cheap and easy, although “honorable,” method of getting rid of
them, was not finally successful.
On the third day of the convention the Rev. Dr. De Koven, of
Wisconsin, brought forward the question of changing the name of
the Protestant Episcopal Church. This proposition was made in the
interest of that section of it which follows the Anglican ritualists.
This section has a real or affected horror of the word “Protestant”;
its members wish to persuade themselves that they are Catholics—
and the wish is very natural and most praiseworthy—but they are
resolved never to seek the reality and yield to the living authority of
the Catholic Church. In order to avoid this submission, they set up
the claim that they are themselves the Catholic Church, or rather “a
branch” of it. To make this claim a little less absurd the elimination
of the word “Protestant” would be advisable; and for some time
past, it appears, an industrious propaganda for this purpose has
been carried on. Certain of the bishops, many of the clergymen,
and a number of the journals of the Protestant Episcopalians have
been enlisted in the proposed “reform,” and its advocates mustered
all their forces in the convention. Dr. De Koven introduced the
matter by reading a paper adopted in the diocese of Wisconsin last
June, and moving a resolution. The paper was as follows:
“Whereas, The American branch of the Catholic Church universal [sic]
includes in its membership all baptized persons in this land; and
“Whereas, The various bodies of professing Christians, owing to her
first legal title, do not realize that the church known in law as the
‘Protestant Episcopal Church’ is, in very deed and truth, the American
branch of the one Catholic Church of God; therefore, be it
“Resolved, That the deputies to the General Convention from this
diocese be requested to ask of the General Convention the appointment
of a constitutional commission, to which the question of a change of the
legal title of the church, as well as similar questions, may be referred.”

Dr. De Koven accordingly presented a motion for the appointment

of this commission and moved its reference to the Committee on
Constitutional Amendments. The absurd side of the assumptions
made in the preamble is apparent; but the ridicule and scorn which
they excite should not blind one to the arrogant claim therein set
up. It is laughable to assert that a sect with less than 270,000
communicants, and with a history of less than a century, claims as
its members all the baptized persons in the United States, including
seven or eight millions of Roman Catholics; it is still more ludicrous
to be told that the reason why we and all the other “baptized
persons” do not recognize this sect as our mother the church is that
up to this time she has chosen to call herself by a false name. The
name—the name’s the thing wherewith to catch the conscience of
the people! Let us only call ourselves something else, and then “all
the baptized persons in this land”—Papists, Presbyterians,
Methodists, Baptists, Mormons, and all the rest—will hasten to
exclaim, “Our long-lost mother! Behold your children!” This is the
ludicrous side of the business, and it is funny enough. The serious
side of it is the fact that a claim so arrogant should be seriously
presented in a convention composed of respectable, and in some
cases eminent, American gentlemen. Let us see what became of it.
Dr. De Koven’s motion immediately caused an animated debate.
An attempt to get rid of it by laying it on the table was lost; and
after a disorderly and heated discussion, in which the president
seemed occasionally to lose his head, the motion for reference to
the committee was carried. On the eighth day of the session the
committee, through Mr. Hamilton Fish, reported that it was
“inexpedient to institute any commission to revise and amend the
constitution of the church,” for the reason, among others, that such
a commission would be unlimited in its powers and might upset
everything. On the tenth day another committee, to whom had
been “referred certain memorials and papers looking to a change in
the legal title of the church,” reported that such a change might
impair the legal right of property in the several dioceses, and that it
would be better to make no change. The two reports came up for
decision on the twelfth day of the session, and the ball was opened
by Dr. De Koven in a long and clever speech. He proposed the
adoption of a new resolution providing for the appointment of a
commission to consider and report upon the best method of
“removing apparent ambiguities,” and “the setting forth our true
relations to the Anglican communion as well as to the whole
Catholic Church.” He drew a very curious and not at all a pleasant
picture of his church as at present constituted. So far as the laity
are concerned, anybody may be a lay member, if he “merely goes
to church a few times a year” and pays money for the support of
the minister. “He need not be baptized; he need not be confirmed;
he need not be a communicant. He may even be Jew, Turk, or
infidel, if you please, provided he has the money qualification which
makes up the franchise of the church.” Here, indeed, is a pitiable
state of things; a society composed of unbaptized persons can
scarcely be called a Christian association. “Underneath it all,” Dr. De
Koven went on to say, “lies this money qualification. The parish
elects its vestry, and its vestry need not be communicants. The
vestry and parish elect the lay delegates to the diocesan
convention, and they need not be communicants. The diocesan
convention elects the lay members of the standing committees, and
they need not be communicants.” The truth is that the ruling
laymen of the sect need not be, and probably are not, Christians at
all, and that they “run the machine” for social and political
purposes, just as they would manage a club or a political party. If
the laymen are of this stripe, what can be said of the priests? “Like
people, like priest,” said Dr. De Koven; “As you go through the land
and witness the sorrow, the trials, the degradation of the parochial
clergy, you are quite well aware that underneath all lies this
simoniacal taint.” The bishops are almost in as sad a state. Their
councils of advice are the standing committees; these may be
composed of unbaptized men, and the bishops have no voice in
their nomination; and “thus you have the marvellous spectacle of a
bishop sitting at the head of his diocesan synod, but bound by laws
which that synod (possibly composed of non-Christians) makes, and
in the making of which he has had no voice whatever, either of
assent or dissent.” It could scarcely be supposed, however, that
evils so great as these would be removed simply by a change of
name, and Dr. De Koven found himself at last willing to admit as
much. He was willing, he said, to go on for a while longer with the
old name, although as long as it was retained such evil
consequences would follow. But he insisted that “the day will come
when this church shall demand, not that an accident of its
condition, not that a part of its organization, should represent it to
the world, but that its immortal lineage shall represent it.”
The church may demand what it pleases, and may call itself by
whatever name it chooses to invent; but its history is written and
cannot be changed. Men will always know that it is the daughter of
that creature whose father was Henry VIII. and whose nursing
mother was Queen Elizabeth. A delegate from Illinois pleaded for
the change of name, for the reason that he was tired of saying on
Sundays, “I believe in the Holy Catholic Church,” and all the rest of
the week, “I believe in the Protestant Episcopal Church.” Mr.
Hamilton Fish declared that it was “too late to change the name of
Protestant Episcopal,” and that if the sect was not Protestant it was
nothing. His great objection, however, was that if the change were
made the church would be in danger of losing its property. Finally,
on the thirteenth day of the session, the resolution for the
appointment of the constitutional committee to consider this and
other changes was voted down by a vote of 16 to 51; and a
separate resolution, that no change should be made in the name of
the church at present, was carried by an almost unanimous vote.
The convention also touched upon marriage and divorce, but
rather gingerly. The House of Bishops passed a resolution repealing
the present canon on this subject, and adopting the following in its
place:
“Section 1. If any persons be joined together otherwise than as God’s
Word doth allow, their marriage is not lawful.
“Sec. 2. No minister of this church shall solemnize matrimony in any
case where there is a divorced wife or husband of either party still
living, and where the divorce was obtained for some cause arising after
marriage; but this canon shall not be held to apply to the innocent party
in a divorce for the cause of adultery, or to parties once divorced
seeking to be united again.
“Sec. 3. If any minister of this church shall have reasonable cause to
doubt whether a person desirous of being admitted to holy baptism, or
to confirmation, or to the holy communion, has been married otherwise
than as the word of God and discipline of this church allow, such
minister, before receiving such person to these ordinances, shall refer
the case to the bishop for his godly judgment thereupon; provided,
however, that no minister in any case refuse the sacrament to a
penitent person in extremis.
“Sec. 4. No minister of this church shall present for confirmation or
administer the holy sacraments to any person divorced, for any cause
arising after marriage, or married again to another in violation of this
canon, or during the lifetime of such divorced wife or husband; but this
prohibition shall not extend to the innocent party where the divorce has
been for the cause of adultery, nor to any truly penitent person.
“Sec. 5. Questions touching the facts of any case arising under this
canon shall be referred to the bishop of the diocese, or, if there be a
vacancy in the episcopate, then to some bishop designated by the
Standing Committee, who shall thereupon make enquiry by a
commissionary or otherwise, and deliver his godly judgment in the
premises.
“Sec. 6. This canon, so far as it affixes penalties, does not apply to
cases occurring before its taking effect, according to canon iv., title iv.”
 From the Roman Catholic point of view there are at least two
objections to this canon. There is no authority pointed out whereby
it may be decided what it is that “God’s word doth allow” respecting
marriage; and the permission for the re-marriage of one of the
parties in a divorce is repugnant to the rule of the church, and
could not for a moment be assented to by any one who holds the
Catholic and Christian doctrine of marriage. In the debate upon the
canon it was urged that the second section could not be enforced
among the Indians nor among the negroes; and some of the
clergymen objected to the section which provides for the reference
of doubtful cases to the bishop. Especial ridicule was cast upon the
sixth section, which, as one delegate expressed it, asserts that “the
longer a man has continued in sin the less sin he has.” More than
one clerical delegate, on the other hand, lifted up his voice in favor
of “greater freedom in the matter,” and they drew pathetic pictures
of the sad condition of a woman divorced from her husband for
incompatibility of temper, for example, and, under this canon,
unable to marry again. But at length the canon was passed.
Our readers can scarcely be expected to take much interest in
the other proceedings of the convention. There was a debate,
lasting through several days, upon a proposed canon for the
creation and development of orders of deaconesses, or
“sisterhoods,” in imitation of our own societies of holy women. The
bishops wished to retain strict control over these possible
organizations; the lower house desired them to be left quite free, or
subject only to the supervision of the parish clergyman. The two
houses could not agree, and the matter was dropped. A still more
tedious debate arose from propositions for the adoption of a
“shortened service,” lay preaching, and the permissible use of the
English Lectionary. There was very little talk about dogma; and it is
noticeable that the quarrels between the Ritualists and the
Evangelicals were kept entirely suppressed during the convention.
The only doctrinal breeze which animated the gathering was caused
by the introduction of a paper by Mr. Judd, of Illinois, which, on the
whole, is so queer that we reproduce it here:
 “Whereas, A majority of the bishops of the Anglican communion at
the Lambeth Conference, held in the year of our Lord 1867, while
solemnly ‘professing the faith delivered to us in Holy Scripture,
maintained in the primitive church and by the fathers of the English
Reformation,’ did also ‘express the deep sorrow with which we view the
divided condition of the flock of Christ throughout the world, ardently
longing for the fulfilment of the prayer of our Lord, “that all may be
one,”’ and did furthermore ‘solemnly record’ and set forth the means by
which ‘that unity will be more effectually promoted’; and
“Whereas, The Lambeth declaration was not only signed by all the
nineteen American bishops then and there present, but the whole
House of Bishops, at the General Convention of 1868, also formally
resolved that they ‘cordially united in the language and spirit’ of the
same; and
“Whereas, Our fervent prayer, daily offered, ‘that all who profess and
call themselves Christians may hold the faith in unity of spirit,’ cannot
receive fulfilment unless there be a clear and steadfast clinging to ‘the
faith once for all delivered to the Saints’; and
“Whereas, The restoration of this ‘unity of spirit’ in the apostolic ‘bond
of peace’ among all the Christian people, for which we thus daily pray,
ought also to be the object of our most earnest efforts; and
“Whereas, This unity manifestly cannot be restored by the submission
of all other parts to any one part of the divided body of Christ, but must
be reached by the glad reunion of all in that faith which was held by all
before the separation of corrupt times began; and
“Whereas, The venerable documents in which the undisputed councils
summed up the Catholic faith are not easily accessible to many of the
clergy, and have never been fully set forth to our laity in a language
‘understanded of the people’; therefore
“Resolved, by the House of Deputies of the Protestant Episcopal
Church in the United States of America, That a memorial be presented
to the Lambeth Conference at its second session, expressing our cordial
thanks for the action of its first session in 1867, in which it enjoined
upon us all the promotion of unity ‘by maintaining the faith in its purity
and integrity, as taught by the Holy Scriptures, held by the primitive
church, summed up in the creeds, and affirmed by the undisputed
general councils’; and, in furtherance of the good work thus
recommended and enjoined, we humbly request the said Lambeth
Conference, by a joint commission of learned divines, or otherwise, to
provide for the setting forth of an accurate and authentic version, in the
 English language, of the creeds and the other acts of the said
undisputed general councils concerning the faith thus proclaimed by
them, as the standards of orthodox belief for the whole church.
“Resolved, also, That the House of Bishops be respectfully requested
to take order that this memorial shall be duly laid before the next
session of the Lambeth Conference by the hand of such of its members
as may be present thereat.”

The debate on this paper was somewhat amusing. It was pointed

out that rather serious consequences might follow the general
dissemination of “an accurate and authentic version, in the English
language, of the creeds and the other acts of the said undisputed
general councils concerning the faith”; and the awful question was
asked, “Who is to decide how many undisputed councils there have
been?” But at last the preamble and resolution were adopted, and
we congratulate our Protestant Episcopalian brethren upon that
decision. Many of them—clergymen as well as laymen—said they
did not know what even the first six œcumenical councils had
decided. If they now acquire this knowledge, they will learn enough
to convince them that they are living in heresy, and that their first
duty is to seek for admission into the church.
“The Church Congress,” which commenced its sessions in New
York on the 30th of October and continued to sit for four days, was
in some degree a supplement to the “convention.” At the congress,
however, nothing was to be done; affairs were simply to be talked
about. In four days much can be said: the papers read and the
speeches made before the Congress will make a large volume when
collected. A Catholic would arise from their perusal with a feeling of
profound melancholy. He would see the blind leading the blind and
tumbling into the ditch. In Protestantism the opinion of one man is
as good as that of another; views the most discordant may be
expressed on the same platform, and there is no arbiter to
pronounce with infallible voice what is truth. In the congress, for
instance, several of its clerical members took occasion to lavish
praises upon the Roman Catholic Church—one of them declared
that the true spirit of the Roman Catholic Church had always been
“tender, true, and noble”; another, a bishop, extolled the work of
our missionaries among the Indians, saying that they “had done the
best work,” and that their conduct was in glorious contrast with that
of the missionaries of the sects, who acted too often like “carpet-
baggers.” These declarations did not prevent other members when
speaking from indulging in bitter denunciations of “Romanism.”
Bishop Potter, at the opening of the congress, warned the members
that they must not expect to settle anything; the only good to be
expected from their discussions was such as might follow the
interchange of opinion. A discussion on church architecture was
ended by a minister who said that churches should be built wholly
with respect to acoustics, and that the ideal church would be a
plain hall where the voice of the preacher could be distinctly heard.
The question of the relation of the church to the state and to
society was discussed at much length—some of the speakers
arguing for a union of church and state, and others advocating
strict abstinence on the part of the church from all political affairs.
Bishop Littlejohn, of Long Island, declared that
“The most urgent duty of the church to the nation was first to
vindicate its moral fitness to sway all in and around it. It should show
that its charter was divine. It should be able to say to the grosser
personality of the nation, ‘Come up higher; this is the way, walk ye in it.’
The first duty of the church to the national life was to put its own house
in order. Again, the church having elevated itself to the level whence it
had a right to teach and authority to guide, its habitual attention should
not be diverted from its great duties to society and to the nation. The
church’s best work was at the root and upon the sap of the social tree
of life, not with the withered and dead branches. It was here that the
church was to exercise its highest functions upon society and upon the
nation. Let it keep before it that one of its highest duties was to show,
both to society and the individual, that they did not derive their
personality from each other, but from God. There was a warrant for
such teaching, for it rested upon a theological principle. Humanity, in
the genuine whole and in the individual man, had its foundation in
Christ, and, therefore, for each there was infinite sacredness, even in
Christ himself. But the church had instructions for society, and especially
for American society. It had some teaching for those who in dreams and
in revolutions cried out for liberty, equality, and fraternity. By how many
 was this cry raised, even to those who would have no sloping sides, no
top, but all bottom to the social pyramid! It seemed that that was a cry
which the church might answer. Liberty, equality, fraternity! The land
was full of false idols under those names. The perversion was of man;
the movement itself was of God. The perversion could be brought about
by forgetting the movement itself. God in Christ not only willed that all
men should be free and equal, but he told them in what sense and how
they were to become so. It was by the ministry of the word, not by the
sword, not by the law, not by abstract speculation, that man was to
learn what these things were for which he so thirsted. Modern society
and the Gospel must be reconciled, and to do this there was no
competent authority except the church.”

Bishop Littlejohn, when speaking of “the church,” has in his mind

his own body. That society can never accomplish the work he points
out; men know that it has no authority to teach them, and those
who speak in its name speak with divided and inconsistent voices.
The church of God, however, can do this work and is doing it. She
has no need “to vindicate her moral fitness” or to “elevate herself to
the level whence she has a right to teach and authority to guide.”
She had all this done for her eighteen hundred years ago, when her
divine charter was given her. And that charter never has been and
never will be revoked.
THE CIVILTA CATTOLICA ON THE FORTIFICATIONS
OF ROME.
There is no European periodical which treats of the great political
movements of the day with more complete knowledge and
consummate ability and sagacity than the Civiltà Cattolica,
especially in respect to all that has a bearing on the Roman
question. In the number of October 6 an article of great interest
takes up the topic of the fortifications around Rome and Civita
Vecchia which have been ordered by the Italian government, and
casts some light on the motives which have induced the persons at
the head of Victor Emanuel’s administration to adopt this
extraordinary measure.
The pretext put forth, that it is necessary to protect Rome against
armed invasion by the reactionary party of the clericals, is so
ridiculous that it has deceived no one, but has excited the ridicule
even of the Italian liberals. But one probable and credible reason
can be given for an undertaking involving such a great expenditure
at a time when the finances of the state are in such a wretched
condition. This reason is that the measure has been undertaken by
the dictation of Bismarck, in virtue of a secret treaty between
Prussia and Italy, and in view of a proposed war of the two
combined powers against France. The Italian kingdom was set up,
as is well known to all, by Napoleon III. for the sake of using its
alliance and employing its military power to the advantage of the
French Empire. The control of this convenient instrument was,
however, wrested from the unfortunate emperor by his conqueror
and destroyer, Bismarck, who has continued to govern not only
William and his empire, but Victor Emanuel and his kingdom, to the
great and increasing disgust of the majority of Italians, including a
large portion even of the liberals. The intention of Bismarck to seize
upon the speediest convenient opportunity of making a new
invasion of France has been too openly manifested to admit of any
doubt. The execution of this purpose has been delayed at the
instance of Russia, in order to leave that power more free and
unembarrassed for its great enterprise of destroying the Ottoman
Empire and taking possession of Constantinople. In the Bismarckian
scheme the war against the Papacy and the Catholic Church,
against France and Austria, is all one thing, with one motive and
end—the exaltation of the infidel Teutonic empire on the ruins of
Latin Christianity and civilization; and the possession of
Constantinople by the Russians as the capital of another great
schismatical empire, dividing with Prussia the hegemony of the
world, harmonizes with this scheme, as planned long ago by the
two astute and powerful chancellors, Gortchakoff and Bismarck.
The papers have been saying of late that Bismarck, whose
ambitious mind triumphs over the shattered nerves and dropsical
body which seem soon about to become the prey of dissolution, has
been lately threatening Europe with a general war for the coming
vernal equinox. This means, of course, that he is preparing an
equinoctial storm of “blood and iron” to mark for ever in history the
close of his own career as the beginning of a new European epoch.
The sagacious writer in the Civiltà considers the order for fortifying
Rome and Civita Vecchia as a strong confirmation of the fact of a
military alliance between the anti-Christian government of Italy and
the Bismarckian empire, and of the probability of an approaching
war by the two allied powers against France. He prudently abstains
from carrying his prognostics any further, wittily observing that it
would be proof of a scanty amount of brains if he were to attempt
anything of the kind. We can easily understand that, for men
writing and publishing in Florence, a certain caution and reserve are
necessary in the open, explicit expression of the hopes and
expectations which they know how to awaken in other minds by a
significant silence. Nevertheless, as we happily enjoy more liberty of
speech than is conceded to Italians when they happen to be
clericals, we will run the risk of passing for a man of “scarso
cervello,” and give utterance to a few of the conjectures which
sprang up in our own mind upon reading the remarks of our able
contemporary.
Both the Bismarckian and the Cavourian political fabrics are in a
precarious condition. It is perhaps less desperate to undertake a
hazardous enterprise on the chance of success than to remain quiet
with the certainty of being swept away by the current of coming
events. Nevertheless, the ruin may be hastened, and even directly
brought about, by the very means which are used to avert the
crisis, if the undertaking is really desperate. Perhaps the bête noir
which harasses the sleepless nights of the Prussian, which the
servile Italian minister threatens upon the people grumbling at their
excessive taxation, which the political apes of French radicalism
pretend to dread, may be the nightmare of a prophetic dream. As
the unhappy victims of a divine fate in the Greek tragedies
accomplish the direful woes foretold at their birth by the very
means used to avert them, the accomplices in the anti-Christian
conspiracy may bring upon themselves the catastrophe they seem
to fear—a reactionary movement in which they will be submerged.
If Italy consents to incur the unknown risks of an alliance with
Prussia, and play the part of a subservient tool to the insane
ambition of Bismarck, one of the consequences may be that her
speedily and falsely constructed unity will be shattered. Russia is at
present too deeply engaged in her deadly struggle with Turkey to
be either a formidable ally or enemy to any other great power for
some time to come, even if she comes off victorious in the end. In
respect to Russia, Austria has now her favorable, perhaps her last,
opportunity to secure her own stability and equality by a repression
of her other antagonist, Prussia. An invasion of France makes
Austria, with her army of one million, the natural ally of France.
There are urgent motives which might draw England into the same
coalition. And what is there improbable in the conjecture that one
of the great events in such a war would be the occupation of the
Pontifical States by the allied troops, and the restoration of the
pontifical sovereignty? If the Pope recovers his royal capital well
fortified, the advantage of the fortifications will be his, and make
him more secure in future against lawless invasion of banditti.
We are not at all certain that a prospective triumph of Russia
bodes so much good to the party of anti-Christian revolution as
many suppose. The interest, the safety even, of that empire
requires of her that she should exert all her power, and co-operate
with every other legitimate power exerted in Europe, to put down
Freemasonry and restore the Christian political order in the civilized
world. It is very probable that when the European congress meets,
after the present cycle of wars, to pacificate Europe and readjust
the equilibrium of nations, neither Gortchakoff nor Bismarck will be
numbered among living statesmen; and that the catalogue of
disasters by which the enemies of the Holy See are punished will be
so far completed for the present century, as to serve a salutary
purpose in warning and instructing the rising and coming statesmen
and sovereigns of Christendom.
 SONNET.

There is a castle of most royal state,

Wherein no warder watches from the walls,
Nor groom nor squire abides in court or halls:
Silent are they, grass-grown and desolate.
A thousand steeds a thousand knights await,
Sleeping, all harnessed, in the marble halls
Until the Appointed One upon them calls,
Winding the horn that hangs beside the gate.
Then shall the doors fly open, and the steeds
Neigh, and the knights leap, shouting, to the selle,
And they shall follow him and do such deeds
All men must own him master. But the spell
Who knows not and, uncalled, essays the horn,
Falls at the fated doors and dies forlorn.
 THE IRISH HEDGE-POETS.
The music of the ancient Irish has been preserved because no
interpreter was needed to translate its beauties into another
tongue. The poetry which accompanied the music has well-nigh
perished, and what remains attracts but little attention. For this
there are two reasons: the students of Celtic literature have been
few, and of those who have endeavored to translate its poetry into
English there are but one or two who have succeeded in any
fortunate degree in retaining the spirit and beauty of the original.
The best as well as earliest collection of Irish poetry is Hardiman’s
Minstrelsy of Ireland, but it is accompanied by feeble and
conventional translations. A literal translation of the poetry would
make this a most valuable collection for the general reader; as it
stands, it is only of worth to those who can read the original Irish.
Several other collections, smaller and of less value, are in existence,
but a real and full collection of Irish poetry has yet to be made. We
are aided in the present article by two small volumes entitled
Munster Poetry, collected by John O’Daly, a well-known Dublin
bookseller and antiquarian, and translated, the first series by the
unfortunate James Clarence Mangan, and the second by Dr. George
Sigurson. They do not attempt to deal with the general subject, but
only profess to be a collection of popular poetry current in Munster
from eighty to one hundred years ago, and composed by the last of
the Irish bards who sang in their native tongue, and were called
“hedge-poets.”
The race of bards or hedge-poets—whichever title may be
preferred—who sang in their native language virtually became
extinct at the beginning of the present century. The history of their
lives, as well as most of their poetry, exists only in tradition, and,
but for a few incomplete collections, would soon vanish for ever. It
is not too late, however, to form some picture of them, and the
value of their poetry is such as to make us deeply regret that no
more has been preserved. And, even without intrinsic merit, the
national poetry of a people is always worth preserving.
During the eighteenth century, as is well known, the Celtic Irish
were at a very low stage of political fortune. The entire subjugation
of Ireland, for the time, occurred at the battle of Limerick. The
flower of the army of Sarsfield followed its gallant leader to the
plains of Minden, and made the reputation of their race as soldiers
under the French banners. Those who remained in Ireland were
crushed into outward subjection. The tyranny of the conquerors,
exasperated by the doubtful and desperate struggle, placed no
bounds to the humiliation which it endeavored to inflict. The penal
laws were cruel and barbarous beyond those of any nation on
record. All intellectual as well as religious education was denied the
Irish people, and it was only by stealth that they could gratify their
thirst for either.
The spirit of the Celtic population was crushed, but not degraded.
They were conquered, and were aware that another struggle was
hopeless for the present. None the less they preserved all their
national feelings. The language of the common people in their daily
intercourse was Irish; their only pride was in Irish tradition, and
their only poetry was in the same melodious tongue. This continued
long after English was the language used for business. It must not
be supposed that, although the Celtic Irish were poor and deprived
of all religious and political rights, they were entirely ignorant or
uncultivated. The average Irish peasant of the last century was
likely to have more learning than his English compeer. The hedge-
schoolmaster was abroad in the land, and the eagerness with which
Irish peasant lads sought for knowledge under difficulties was only
second to the fervency of their religious faith under persecution.
The education was not of the most valuable or practical cast in all
particulars, but that it was cultivated so earnestly is the highest
proof of the undegraded character of the people. The hedge-
schoolmasters were more learned in Latin than in science, and
taught their pupils to scan more assiduously than to add. The
traditionary Irish history, the exploits of Con of the Hundred Battles,
Welcome to our website – the perfect destination for book lovers and
knowledge seekers. We believe that every book holds a new world,
offering opportunities for learning, discovery, and personal growth.
That’s why we are dedicated to bringing you a diverse collection of
books, ranging from classic literature and specialized publications to
self-development guides and children's books.

More than just a book-buying platform, we strive to be a bridge

connecting you with timeless cultural and intellectual values. With an
elegant, user-friendly interface and a smart search system, you can
quickly find the books that best suit your interests. Additionally,
our special promotions and home delivery services help you save time
and fully enjoy the joy of reading.

Join us on a journey of knowledge exploration, passion nurturing, and

personal growth every day!

testbankdeal.com