2
In obedience to your commands we have taken these papers into our consideration, and have the honour to
Report
That we do not regard the question as altogether free from difficulty, but, on the whole, the better opinion appears to us to be that the Bill should have been reserved for the signification of Her Majesty's pleasure.
The Right Hon. Edward Cardwell, M.P.,
&o.
&c.
&o.
ROUNDELL PALMER.
We have, &c.
(Signed)
R. P. COLLIER.
7024.
No. 420.
(GENERAL.)
LAW OFFICERS to COLONIAL OFFICE.
REPORT of the LAW OFFICERS upon CASE submitted to thera by SIR F. ROGERS on the 14th July 1866, as to the consecration of Bishops for the Colonies by the Arch- bishop of Canterbury under Warrant from the Queen: Whether Colonial Bishops are precluded from performing the act of consecration without Mandate from the Crown.
Report
Lincoln's Inn, July 20, 1866.
THAT two questions are submitted to us in the letter of Sir F. Rogers :-
1. With respect to the first question, namely, as to the consecration in this country of bishops who are to exercise their spiritual functions in those of Her Majesty's We understand that for the Colonies which possess representative institutions? future no Letters Patent are to be granted to such bishops, and no dioceses are for the future to be marked out, either by way of definition or limitation, for the exercise of their functions. We therefore think that an authority under the signet and sign manual of the archbishop, following to a considerable extent the wording of those used in the case of the Bishop of Rupert's Land, and under the statute 5 Vict. c. 6. (see note to Stephens' Ecclesiastical Statutes, pages 2150-2151), will suffice for the purpose for which alone it is required, namely, to authorise his Grace to perform in this country the spiritual office of consecration. The rubric in the consecration service is as follows: "Then shall the bishop demand the Queen's mandate for the "consecration, and cause it to be read." There is no special form of mandate prescribed by the rubric in the Prayer Book.
We append the form of mandate* or authority which appears to us proper fo rthe
occasion.
2. With respect to the second question, namely, whether Colonial bishops are precluded from performing an act of consecration in the Colonies without a mandate from the Crown, we are of opinion that the rubric in question is not, in the absence of any enactment, in legal force and operation in the Colonies, and that the enactments in 25 Hen. 8. c. 20. ss. 3, 4, and 5, are inapplicable except in the case of a bishop appointed to a legal see or diocese, and we answer the question in the negative.
We have, &c. (Signed)
The Right Hon. the Earl of Carnarvon.
&c.
&c.
&c.
• The draft mandate is missing.
H. M. CAIRNS. W. BOVILL.
R. PHILLIMORE.
0
16978.-154.
25.---5/86,
PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE
2 31
Reference :-
LTIC.O. 885
וווו
COPYRIGHT PHOTOGRAPH-NOT TO
BE
11 PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE, LONDON
ALLY WITHOUT PERMISSION OF THE
REPRODUCED PHOTOGRAPHIC-