CO885-(2-3) — Page 42

PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE

Reference -

C.O-885

2 PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE, LONDON

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

2

not a thing to be lightly done. But in case your memorialist should succeed in convincing the Government that the passing of the present Bill (or one to the like effect) is essential to the welfare of the Church within the Colony, and that the mainte- nance of the ecclesiastical prerogatives of the Crown, as sometimes defined, in their complete integrity, will most materially cripple the efficiency, if it do not actually endanger the existence of that branch of the Church, your memorialist ventures to think that neither the Government will be unwilling to advise, nor Her Majesty to consent to, the relinquish- ment of a power which can no longer be retained without prejudice to the community which it was designed to protect and support.

Your memorialist, therefore, begs to observe:--

I. That the existing constitution of the branch of the United Church of England and Ireland situate within the Colony of Victoria, is extremely defective and objectionable.

2. That such constitution cannot be placed on a sound basis except by such means as those provided by the present Bill.

3. That the Bill does not in fact interfere with any right of the Crown which is in actual exercise, but only with a dormant prerogative, the mainte- nance of which, though it disable others from acting, does not place the Crown in a position to act itself.

With respect to the first of these three points, your memorialist would remind Her Majesty's Government, that by the existing Local Act regu- lating the temporal affairs of the Church within the Colony, all appointments of ministers therein are subject to the absolute approval and license of the Bishop of the Diocese, or Archbishop of the Pro- vince; and that the licence of any clergyman may be withdrawn or revoked, and his bouse, glebe, and living taken from hit by such Bishop at his plea- Bure; subject, indeed, to the condition that cause be shown, but without any regular (if any) means of testing its sufficiency or accuracy.

Hence it follows that the constitutional status and rights possessed by the inferior clergy, and by the Laity in the mother country, have no existence in

{

3

the Colony, and that the sole, unaided, as well as unfettered authority vested in the Bishop, is open to the opposite dangers of leading to oppression or anarchy, according as it may be vested in the hands of an arbitrary or of an indulgent or timid prelate.

Upon the second point your memorialist would observe that the Church of England, baving no legally recognised position within the Colony, the system of Ecclesiastical Law which exists in the inother country, and by which the mutual relations of the several orders of clergy and of the laity are regulated, does not admit of being applied to the members of the Church there.

That it is certain that neither the Imperial Legis- lature, nor the Legislative Council of the Colony, will undertake to supply the members of the Church of England there with a code of regulations for the management of their affairs.

That consequently such regulations can only be framed by the members of the Church themselves.

That, nevertheless, to make them generally bind- ing upon such members, or upon future Bishops, the regulations must be drawn up under an authority given either by the Local or the Imperial Legislature. That, further, it is essential to the efficient accom- plishment of the task, and to the general acceptabi- lity of the result, that the regulations be drawn up upon the joint deliberation and with the joint con- currence of the clergy and laity, the latter acting (as only they can) by representation, and that, for this purpose, some such Elective Assembly as that proposed by the Bill must necessarily be esta blished.

That it is also essential that there should be provi- sions for convoking, adjourning, and dissolving such Assembly from time to time.

Lastly, with regard to the third point, your Memorialist submits that assuming the power of con- voking, adjourning, and dissolving assemblies of this description in all parts of Her Majesty's dominions to be an inherent portion of the Royal Prerogative, it is clear that this power could not, in the case of so distant a Colony, be exercised by Her Majesty personally, or by the Home Government in Her behalf.

}