CO885-(2-3) — Page 309

PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE

TITUTI

Reference :-

C.O.885

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

3 PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE, LONDON

10

Crown offices in London (at some little cost either to this country or the Bishop), and that appeals from the Bishop's decisions are entertained by the Judicial Committee not only in the character of Colonial causes, but also in the character of eccle- siastical causes.

But, whether or not this is an adequate account of the matter, the persons who have a right to be heard on the present question are divisible into the two classes above described.

Persons of the first class, those who look exclu- sively to the spiritual or administrative advantages derivable from the presence and authority of an Anglican diocesan Bishop, would not be much affected by discovering that the Bishop's Letters Patent were invalid.

They would only desire that, a misapprehension being removed, its inconvenient consequences should be removed also, and that the society should be allowed to retain its existing state, just as if it had been constituted by voluntary consent on its present basis without any misapprehension at all.

They would probably be satisfied (apart from the question of succession, of which hereafter) by an enactment to the effect that no voluntary agree- ment, gift, or other act made or done by or to any supposed Diocesan, or in relation to any supposed Diocese, should be held invalid on the ground that the Letters Patent purporting to constitute such Diocese or appoint such Diocesan were invalid.

To persons of the second class the invalidity of the Letters Patent would be material. They would desire to withdraw their adherence from the Bishop or to resume the money given towards the endow- ment of the Diocese, unless the Diocese were invested with those legal attributes which I have endeavoured to define, and on the faith of which that adherence and that money were given. If, as I believe, the latter alternative cannot properly be adopted, the former remains for them;

and they would therefore object in Parliament, as through Lord St. Leonards they have virtually objected, to

a law which would attach to a Voluntary Bishopric

what had been given to a Crown Bishopric.

And, in connection with this difficulty, it happens that a suit is now pending in a Court of Law between the Bishop of Natal and his trustees, who refuse to

Il

pay him his salary on the ground that his Letters Patent are invalid.

The proposed enactment must either settle this suit in favour of the Bishop, which would be an unprecedented interference with pending litigation, or must exclude him from its benefit, which would be highly invidious.

All these objections, however, might be mitigated,

if not removed, by providing that the proposed Law should not interfere with the determination of any suit instituted within one year of its enactment. Those who wished to reclaim their money would thus have the opportunity of doing so; but probably few would really do so, and the matter would thus

be settled quietly.

But supposing all this done, the question remains, -When the Voluntary Bishop dies, how is his succession to be determined?

It evidently cannot be assumed that these Volun- tary Societies will all be content with a Crown nomination, and if so, Parliament cannot properly proceed to vest the nomination in the Crown. Still less could Parliament vest that nomination in any other authority. It can but provide that the matter shall be settled by the agreement of the parties interested; and the very difficult question then arises, who those parties are?

any

It is a question, I conceive, not capable of legal answer. But it seems to me (though with much doubt), that it might not be hopeless to furnish

a practical answer by empowering the Crown, under certain conditions, to legalize in any Colonial Dio- cese a mode of appointment palpably agreeable to the mass of those who call themselves Churchmen, as, e. g., if the Crown were empowered by Order in Council to bring into force any such scheme for the appointment of the successor to any existing Bishop, as might be submitted by the Archbishop of Canterbury, supported by the request of the Bishop concerned (if living), and by such evidence as the Crown shall deem satisfactory of the general concur- rence of the Clergy and Laity who form his reputed Diocese.

If this mode of settlement were adopted, then the difficulty as regards the Bishops would, it appears to me, be disposed of by the following steps:-

6