2
(4.) Does it appear to us that any inconvenience is likely to arise to parties who have contracted or may hereafter contract marriages in Queensland, if it should appear that the provision of the New South Wales Act which requires that all marriages should be celebrated by ministers registered at Sydney had been generally neglected in Queensland; and if so, what steps should be taken to remove that inconvenience ?
In obedience to your commands, we have taken this matter into our consideration, and have the honour to
Report
1. That we think no enlargement of the Bishop of Brisbane's diocese has taken place since its original creation by the Letters Patent of 6th June 1859, and therefore that his Lordship has no territorial jurisdiction of any kind beyond the limits of the see defined in those Letters Patent.
2. That in our opinion the Bishop of Sydney still retains all such ecclesiastical jurisdiction over the parts of Queensland referred to in this question as he had before the original creation of the bishopric of Brisbane.
3. That under the New South Wales Marriage Act, it is of no importance to the validity of any marriage whether an "ordinarily officiating" clergyman of the Church of England, who solemnises it, is licensed by any bishop or not; nor (if licensed) whether he derives his license from a bishop lawfully entitled to exercise jurisdiction We are, therefore, clearly of opinion, that all in the place where he officiates or not. marriages which have been or may be performed within the parts of Queensland referred to in this question by any clergyman licensed by the Bishop of Brisbane are valid in law, although the bishop (in an ecclesiastical point of view) may have had no authority to grant such licenses.
4. The 21st section of the New South Wales Marriage Act expressly provides that the non-registration at Sydney of any minister of religion by whom a marriage may be solemnised shall not affect the validity of the marriage. That part of the 2nd section, which appears to make the registration of the minister necessary, is thus explained to be directory only, and the omission to comply with it, although it may expose the officiating minister to penalties, will not, in our opinion, vitiate the mar- riage. To the parties, therefore, who have contracted or who may hereafter contract marriages in Queensland, no inconvenience appears to us likely to arise, even from a general disregard of this provision in that Colony, beyond the loss of that evidence which the register at Sydney would have afforded of the character of the person solemnising the marriage as an "ordinarily officiating minister of religion."
We have, &c. (Signed) ROUNDELL PALMER.
R. P. COLLIER.
The Right IIon. Edward Cardwell, M.P.
&c.
&c.
&c.
1225.
SIB,
No. 308.
(ST. LUCIA.)
FOREIGN OFFICE to COLONIAL OFFICE.
Foreign Office, February 9, 1865. WITH reference to your letter of the 21st ultimo, enclosing a copy of a corre- spondence received from the Governor of the Windward Islands, reporting the circum- stances under which he had declined to surrender to the commander of the French ship of war "L'Amaranthe," four sailors who had deserted from that vessel, I am directed by Earl Russell to acquaint you, for the information of Mr. Secretary Cardwell, that he referred that correspondence to the Law Officers of the Crown for their opinion as to the proceedings of Governor Walker in the matter.
I am now to state to you that the Law Officers have reported that the Administrator of the Government of St. Lucia was rightly advised by the Attorney General of that Island that these French seamen could not be delivered up under the existing treaties between France and Great Britain.
The Under Secretary of State,
Colonial Office.
0 1497B.--886.
25.-2/86.
I am, &c.
(Signed)
E. HAMMOND.
។
PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE
། ། ། །
C.O.
Reference :-
885
PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE, LONDON ALLY WITHOUT PERMISSION OF THE BE REPRODUCED PHOTOGRAPHIC- COPYRIGHT PHOTOGRAPH—NOT TO