་ ་་
PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE
TLITTI
Reference :-
C.O.885
ALLY WITHOUT PERMISSION OF THE BE REPRODUCED PHOTOGRAPHIC-
COPYRIGHT PHOTOGRAPH-NOT TO
PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE, LONDON
20
Colonies comprised in them possessed representative institutions except the following:
St. Lucia in the diocese of Barbados, and Trini- dad in that of Antigua, were and are purely Crown Colonies.
British Guiana had and retains a partially Repre- sentative Legislature, continued with certain modi- ficatious from the time of the Dutch Government. But the Crown has reserved to itself, and is held to retain, and in fact has exercised the power of legis- lating by Order in Council.
In the diocese of Jamaica, Honduras possessed an auomalous form of government to which it was difficult to apply any rule. It has since received representative institutions.
The Acts of Parliament relating to the West Indian Colonies do not touch on the question of jurisdiction; but laws have been passed in many of the Colonies having for their object to enable the Bishop to enforce discipline upon the clergy.
AUSTRALIA.
Australia not having been acquired by conquest or cession, the Crown has never possessed the prerogative power of legislation.
In 1828, by the Act of Parliament 9 Geo. IV, cap. 63, His Majesty was authorized to exercise in
New South Wales and Van Diemen's Land (secs.
10, 13, 15) certain limited powers of legislation by Order in Council; but subject to the exercise of these powers, the power of making laws for the peace, welfare, and good government of the Colonies was to be exercised (secs. 20, 21) by the Governor of each Colony, with a Council of persons nominated by the Crown.
In 1836, the See of Australia was constituted, and Bishop Broughton was appointed in the usual
way, and with the powers of jurisdiction.
In 1842, the Bishopric of Tasmania was carved out of that of New South Wales, the form of government remaining that originally established there; and the powers given being those of juris- diction. Before long, however, petitions were re- ceived from some of the inhabitants of the Colony,
21
and particularly from certain Baptist Ministers and Presbyterians, objecting to these Letters-Patent, and especially to that part which authorized the Bishop to summon witnesses before the Ecclesiastical Court.
The Law Officers, Sir John Dodson, Sir J. Jervis, and Sir D. Dundas, were requested by the Secretary of State for the Colonies to report on the matter, and particularly to consider "whether any real advantage is to he anticipated from the introduction into the proposed Letters-Patent of any provisions whatever, beyond a declaration of the Royal pleasure that a new Bishopric shall be created with a specified titular desiguation, and with a distinct specification of the territorial limits of the intended See, adding
(if that be proper) the appointment by name of the first or original Bishop." It was added that “the Bishops to whom such patents' have been addressed have sometimes been involved in grave difficulties, from regarding every part of them as really opera- tive and effectual, and from attempting to reduce every part of them to practice."
The Law Officers were silent on the question thus particularly referred to them, but were of opinion that "Her Majesty had no authority by Letters-Patent to create the ecclesiastical jurisdiction complained of in the memorials referred to, and that therefore the objections were well founded."
The Letters-Patent of the Bishop of Tasmania were therefore, with his consent, revoked and others were issued which omitted the power to summon witnesses, the power to examine on oath, the express mention of jurisdiction and the express power to punish by suspension, deprivation, or otherwise, and only authorized the Bishop to visit the clergy, to call them before him, and to inquire as to their morals and behaviour in their offices and stations.
As soon as this question was settled, i. e., in 1847, the Bishopric of Australia was divided into the four Bishoprics of Sydney, Newcastle, Melbourne, and Adelaide; metropolitan powers over the other three dioceses as well as Tasmania being given to the Bishop of Sydney. In all these dioceses the episcopal powers were reduced to those of visitation.
The three dioceses of Sydney, Newcastle, and Melbourne, comprised together the then Colony of New South Wales, where partially representative
G
Page 240Page 241