CO885(2-3) — Page 169

92

purpose supplementary Letters-Patent to the Bishop of Christ Church, revoking so much of his Letters-Fatent as make him suffragan to the Bishop of Sydney, would (it is submitted) be required.

Mr. Herman Merivale was also pleased to transmit copies of the Letters- Patent of Bishop Selwyn, and of those of Bishop Harper, of Christ Church.

I have the honour to report that, with reference to the provisions suggested as proper to be made in the new Letters-Patent, no difficulty exists as to the first three of such provisions, which may be properly and conveniently intro- duced.

With reference to the fourth provision I have to observe that very serious objections appear to me to exist to its introduction therein :-

(a.) No precedent (as far as I am aware) exists in the United Church of England and Ireland, either here or in the colonies, for the election of a Bishop to exercise a jurisdiction over a vacant diocese by the other Bishops of the province. The introduction of such a principle into Letters-Patent appears to me to be inexpedient.

a

(b.) The practical operation of any such principle will, in my opinion, be most inconvenient in New Zealand; for, no person being designated to act, the vacant diocese will remain under episcopal supervision only provisionally and until a Bishop has been "appointed" to its temporary administration by " majority of the other Bishops of the province." The form and manner of such appointment will be uncertain; and, as these prelates will be at a distance from each other without easy means of communication (some of them, possibly, out the colony), and the Bishop (when appointed) may also not be near or within easy reach of the vacant diocese, until the appointment is formally complete and is known in the diocese nothing will be definite; legal uncertainty and doubts will almost inevitably present themselves at every stage of such a proceeding, which has not as yet been found requisite in the neighbouring province of Australia, for instance, and which will, in my opinion, rather tend in practice to create than to obviate doubts and difficulties of various kinds.

If, however, any provision of this kind is urgently required, I would suggest that a provision similar to that which is in the Patent of the Lord Bishop of Calcutta (10th May last) would be preferable to that now suggested.

This provision is to the effect that on a vacancy of the See the Episcopal jurisdiction and functions thereto appertaining shall be exercised by such one of the Suffragran Bishops for the time being as shall have been first consecrated. It is thus immediately both certain and notorious who, in case of a sudden vacancy, is empowered to act until there is a new Bishop.

With respect to the fifth provision, I have to observe that serious objections in principle and practice appear to me to exist against the suggested election of the Metropolitan (after the first vacancy) by the Suffragans.

I need scarcely point out that in none of the existing Anglican Provinces, neither in Canterbury, York, Toronto, Calcutta, or Sydney (in all of which Metropolitans or Primates now exist', is there any precedent of this sort to be found. The Primacy, on the contrary, has always been, and is by ancient usage, or express designation by the Crown in Letters-Patent, vested in the Prelate who is Incumbent of a particular See, generally in the Incumbents of the original or first Sec, agreeably to the ancient and consistent usage of other branches of the Church.

With reference to the proposed change as regards the Bishop of Christ Church, I have to observe that it will be somewhat difficult and inconvenient (although not impracticable) now to effect this change.

This matter was maturely considered in 1856 (see my Reports, April 3, 1852, and June 30, 1856), and it was then considered unadvisable to do what is now proposed, no doubt upon sufficient grounde, notwithstanding the con- trary opinion of his Grace the Archbishop of Canterbury, of the Bishop of Christ Church, and of myself.

I observe in the letter of the Bishop of New Zealand, an allusion to some correspondence with his Grace the Archbishop of Canterbury on the subject of the proposed new Sees in New Zealand.

I need scarcely point out the propriety of not making such extensive ecclesiastical changes without the entire approbation of his Grace, with whom

I ought perhaps to be instructed to place myself in communication.

93

Under these circumstances, I would respectfully suggest that existing pre- cedents, ancient and consistent usage, and uniformity should be adhered to, rather than suggestions emanating (as far as I am aware) from one Colonial Prelate only. That accordingly the three first provisions only should be intro- duced into these patents.

Upon the whole, I have the honour to await your further (and final) instructions before preparing these Instruments.

I must, lastly, under any circumstances request permission to have the assistance of the Queen's Proctor in preparing them.

(Signed)

The Right Hon. Sir E. B. Lytton, Bart., &c.

&c.

&c.

I have &c.

J. D. HARDING.

า

PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE

C.O. 8

Reference -

885

3 PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE, LONDON

ALLY WITHOUT PERMISSION OF THE BE REPRODUCED PHOTOGRAPHIC-

COPYRIGHT PHOTOGRAPH-NOT TO