CO885(2-3) — Page 351

CANADA

No. 84.

38

CORRESPONDENCE RELATIVE TO

Sir Frederic Rogers was also pleased to add that your Lordship would be glad to be favoured with our early opinion upon this subject.

In obedience to your Lordship's commands, we have perused the papers submitted to us, and have the honour to report that we are of opinion that the letter which your Lordship proposes to send to the Bishop of Montreal is right and proper to be sent.

The Right Hon. the Earl of Carnarvon,

&c.

&c.

&zc.

We have, &c.

(Signed)

No. 34.

JOHN ROLT,

W. BOVILL.. ROBERT PHILLIMORE.

COPY of a LETTER from the LAW OFFICERS of the Crows to the Right Hon. the Earl of CARNARVON.

MY LORD,

Lincoln's Inn, November 20, 1866. We are honoured with your Lordship's commands, signified in Mr. Elliot's letter of the 12th instant, stating that he was directed by your lordship to refer us to the letter of the 2d instant, in which we reported our opinion that the letter which it was proposed to address to the Bishop of Montreal, relating to the appointment of the Archdeacon of Toronto to be coadjutor-bishop of that diocese, under the title of "the Bishop of Niagara," and his consecration in Canada, was right and proper to be sent; and Mr. Elliot was directed to request that we would reconsider that letter in connexion with the judgment recently pronounced by the Master of the Rolls in the case of Colenso versus The Trustees of the Colonial Bishoprics Fund; and that we would inform your lordship, at our earliest convenience, whether that judgment leads us in any way to qualify the opinion with regard to the letter to the Bishop of Montreal which was given in our report of the 2nd instant, before referred to.

Mr. Elliot was also pleased, for the purpose of reference, to return the case as already submitted to us in the letter from the Colonial Office of the 30th ultimo.

In obedience to the commands of your Lordship we have reconsidered the question submitted to us, and have the honour to report,-

That the judgment of the Master of the Rolls does not lead us in any way to qualify the opinion with regard to the letter to the Bishop of Montreal which was given in our report of the 2d instant.

The Right Hon. the Earl of Carnarvon,

&c.

&c.

&c.

We have, &c. (Signed)

JOHN ROLT.

W. BOVILL. ROBERT PHILLIMORE.

COLONIAL BISHOPRICS.

39

effect, and under such circumstances it would hardly be consistent with the dignity of the Crown that Her Majesty should be advised to issue such mandate. It will thus rest with yourself and the other bishops of Canada, and will be in your power, under the Canadian Acts of 19 & 20 Vict. c. 121. and 22 Vict. c. 139., to determine, without hindrance or assistance from the Royal Prerogative, in what manner the consecration of the Bishop of Niagara shall be effected.

You are, of course, aware that under Imperial Acts, of which 59 Geo. III. c. 60, is the chief, clergymen ordained by Colonial bishops not having local jurisdiction, and residing within the limits of that jurisdiction, are subjected to certain disabilities, except where their ordination is effected under commission from a diocesan bishop and within his diocese.

I have, &c.

CARNARVON.

The Bishop of Montreal.

No. 36.

(Signed)

i

No. 86.

Copy of a LETTER from Sir FREDERIC ROGERS, Bart., to the Bishop of MONTREAL. MY LORD,

Downing Street, November 29, 1866. WITH reference to your Lordship's letter of the 10th ultimo, and to the Earl Page of Carnarvon's reply,† relative to the consecration of the coadjutor-bishop of the diocese ↑ Page of Toronto, I am directed by his Lordship to transmit to you, for your information, a No 189, copy of a despatch from the Governor of Canada, enclosing a copy of an Address to p Her Majesty on that subject from the Synod of that diocese, together with a copy of the Separate reply which Lord Carnarvon has returned to that despatch.

I have, &c. (Signed) FREDERIC ROGERS.

The Bishop of Montreal,

&c.

&c.

8th Nov. 1666,

19th Nov, 1866,

P

No. 35.

l'age

No. 35.

Copy of a LETTER from the Right Hon. the Earl of CARNARVON to the Bishop of MONTREAL.

Downing Street, November 21, 1866.

MY LORD,

I HAVE received your Lordship's letter of the 10th of October, relating to the proposed appointment of the Archdeacon of Toronto to coadjutor-bishop of that diocese, under the title of "Bishop of Niagara," and his consecration in Canada with us little delay as possible.

It appears, by the recent decision of the Judicial Committee in the case of the Bishop of Natal, that Her Majesty has not the power to create a diocese or assign a sphere of action to a bishop in a Colony in which an independent Legislature has been established. And it is the opinion of the Law Officers of the Crown, to whom I have caused this question to be submitted, that a mandate from the Crown is not necessary to enable Colonial bishops to perform the act of consecration.

As, therefore, the intervention of the Crown is not legally required either to give to the Archdeacon of Toronto the intended jurisdiction, or to authorize his consecration to the office of bishop, it would not appear that the proposed mandate could have any legal

E 4

A

}

PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE

Reference

TTC.O.885

3 PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE, LONDON ALLY WITHOUT PERMISSION OF THE BE REPRODUCED PHOTOGRAPHIC. COPYRIGHT PHOTOGRAPH¬NOT TO

}