CO885(2-3) — Page 274

4

a letter to the Secretary of State for the Colonies in

the following terms:-

[His Lordship then read the letter, and stated the resolution of the Council for increasing the endow- ment of the two bishoprics of Natal and Graham's Town by 300%. a-year, and the effect of the Letters- Patent of the 23rd of November, 1853, as before stated.]

From the period when this took place, the sum of 3621. 10s., being the interest of the 10,000, reduced to that amount by the payment of two sums out of the Colonial Bishoprics' Fund, for the use of the Bishop of Natal, and the sum of 3007. additional, in pursuance of the Resolution of the 26th of July, 1852, making together the sum of 6627. 10s., have been regularly paid to the l’laintiff up to and including the 5th of April, 1864. Since that time this sum has been carried to a separate account.

In May 1863, a charge was made against the Plaintift that he had been guilty of false and erro- neous teaching and doctrine, by the publication of

certain books, within the Province of Cape Town, and the Plaintiff was cited to appear and auswer the charge before the Bishop of Cape Town on the 17th of November, 1863.

The Plaintiff, by his agent, Dr. Bleek, protested against the exercise of any jurisdiction over him by

the Bishop of Cape Town, who, nevertheless, as his Metropolitan, investigated the charges against the Plaintiff, and pronounced a sentence of deprivation against him on the 16th of December, 1863.

On the 15th of April, 1864, the Bishop of Cape Town wrote to the Secretary of the Council of Colonial Bishopries, communicating the sentence he had pronounced, and requesting that they would cease to pay the interest of any endowment to the Bishop.

2

The Plaintiff presented petition of complaint and appeal to Her Majesty against the proceedings and sentence of the Bishop of Cape Town. Her Majesty referred the matter to the Judicial Com- mittee of the Privy Council, who, after hearing counsel for the Plaintiff and for the Bishop of Cape Town, made their report on the 20th of March, 1865, in which they reported their opinion to be, that the sentence pronounced by the Bishop of Cape

Town was null and void.

5

On this Judgment being

given, the Plaintiff applied to the Defendants, the trustees, for payment to him of the stipend appro- priated to the Bishop of Natal as theretofore. This the Defendants have declined to do. They have also declined to pay the Bishop of Cape Town his salary, and their reason for so doing is expressed in

the 39th paragraph of their answer, which, as it sets forth the ground of their defence very clearly and distinctly, I think it proper to read.

[His Lordship then read the 39th paragraph of the answer before stated.]

These are all the facts which I think are necessary

to be referred to in order to explain the character of the questions which are raised, and which I have to determine.

Before proceeding to consider the propositions which, in my opinion, must be decided, in order to arrive at the ultimate conclusion whether the Plaintiff is or is not entitled to the relief he asks, it

will be convenient that I should state the questions which, in my opinion, I have not to consider; and, first of all, I have not to consider whether the Plaintiff, by false and erroneous teaching or doctrine,

or in other manner, has misconducted himself as a Bishop. I have nothing to do with the question whether his works have or have not an heretical tendency. That question might have been raised, and might have had an important bearing on the question whether the Plaintiff is or is not entitled to be paid the salary in question; but that question not only is not raised, but it seems to have been on both sides carefully excluded from the pleadings.

I must, therefore, in dealing with the questions in this case, proceed on the assumption that neither in respect of morals nor in respect of doctrine is there anything to disqualify the Plaintiff from acting as Bishop of Natal.

In the second place, I have not to consider whether the Letters-Patent, creating the diocese of Natal, and appointing the Plaintiff the Bishop thereof, are, or not, wholly null and void. That question may be tried before some other tribunal, or

in some other cause, in which their validity may be challenged, but it cannot be tried in this suit as at present constituted.

What I have now to consider is, the force and

C

PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE

Reference -

FTTT TTC.O.885

3 PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE. LONDON

ALLY WITHOUT PERMISSION OF THE BE REPRODUCED PHOTOGRAPHIC- COPYRIGHT PHOTOGRAPH-NOT TO