■m'^^r-^ ^. immge evaluation test target (mt-3) // /. I/.. % <^ 1.0 I.I 1.25 Hi 12.5 I II 2.2 2.0 U III 1.6 / r ' v: 0% ^J> ^Vj>V ■/^ # ^ 'V>\^. ''''> -*/ 7 Photographic Sciences Corporation 23 WEST MAIN STRICT WEBSTER, N.Y. MSBO (716) S72-4S03 ■ ^^B^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^H^' ''" * rSifa*-?? '~:— ^^^^^^^^^^^■b=y£7'^ «*^.^^^^^H ^^^^^^^^^^g^^^^^^i^N^^^^^H ? • w CIHM/ICMH CIHM/ICMH Microfiche Collection de Series. microfiches. Canadian Institute for Historical Microreproductions / Instltut Canadian de microreproductions historiques Tachnical and Bibliographic Notaa/Notas tachniquaa at bibliographiquaa Tha Instituta has attamptad to obtain tha bast original copy availabia for filming. Faaturas of this copy which may ba bibliographically uniqua, which may altar any of tha imagas In tha reproduction, or which may significantly changa tha usual mathod of filming, ara chackad balow. □ Colourad covars/ Couvartura da coulaur □ Covars damagad/ Couvartura andommag(^ □ Covars restored and/or laminated/ Couverture restaur^ et/ou pellicula D D D a a Cover title missing/ Le titre de couverture manque Coloured maps/ Cartes gtographiqu«is en coulaur Colourad ink (i.e. other than blue or black)/ Encre de couleur (i.e. autre que bleua ou noire) I I Coloured plates and/or illustrations/ D Planches et/ou illustrations en coulaur Bound with other material/ Rail* avac d'autraa documents Tight binding may causa shadows or distortion along interior margin/ La re liure serrAe peut causer de I'ombre ou de la distorsion la long da la marge intirieura Blank leaves added during restoration may appear within the text. Whenever possible, these have been omitted from filming/ II se peut que certainaa pagea blanches ajoutAes lors d'une restauration apparaissant dans la taxta, mais, lorsque cela Atait possible, cas pages n'ont pas itt filmias. Additional comments:/ Commentairas supplAmentaires; L'Instltut a microfilm* le meilleur exemplaire qu'il lui a it* possible de se procurer. Les d*tails de cet exemplaire qui sont peut-*tre uniques du point de vue bibliographique. qui peuvent modifier una image reproduite. ou qui peuvent exiger une modification dans la m*thoda normala de filmage sont indiqu*a ci-dessous. □ Coloured pages/ Pagea de couleur □ Pagea damaged/ Pages andommag*as D D Pages restored and/or laminated/ Pages restaur*es et/ou pellicul*es Pages discoloured, stained or foxed/ Pages d*color*es. tachet*es ou piqu( *es □ Pages detached/ Pages d*tachees r~| Showthrough/ Transparence Quality of print varies/ Qualit* in*gale de I'impression Includes supplementary material/ Comprand du mat*rial suppl*mentaire Only edition available/ Scule *dition dispontble Pages wholly or partially obscured by errata slips, tissues, etc.. have been ref limed to ensure the best possible image/ Les pages totalament ou partiellement obscurcies par un feuillet d'arrata. une pelure, etc.. ont *t* film*es A nouveau de facon A obtcnir la meilleure image possible. This item is fi'-ned at the reduction ratio checked below/ Ce document est film* au taux de r*duction indiqu* ci-deaaous. 10X 14X 18X 22X J\ 26X 30X 12X 1CX 20X a4x 28X 32X Th« copy filntMl h«r« hat lM*n reproduced thanks to the generosity of: The Nova Scotia Lagiilativa Library The images appearing here are the best quality possible considering the condition and legibility of the original copy and in keeping with the filmfng contract specifications. L'exemplaire film* fut reproduit grice * la gAnirosIt* de: Ths Nova Scotia Lagislstiva Library Les images sulvantes ont 4itt reproduites avec le plus grand soin, compte tenu de la condition at de la netteti de l'exemplaire film*, et en conformM avec les conditions du contrat de fllni^ge. Original copies in printed paper covers are filmed beginning with the front cover and ending on the last page with a printed or illustrated impres- sion, or the back cover when appropriate. All other original copies are filmed beginning on the first page with a printed or illustrated impres- sion, and ending on the last page with a printed or illustrated impression. Les exemplalres originaux dont la couverture en papier est Imprimis sont filmte en commenpant par le premier plat et en terminant soit par la dernlAre page qui comporte une empreinte d'Impression ou d'illustration, soit par le second plat, salon le cas. Tous les autres exemplalres originaux sont filmis en commenpant par la premiere page qui comporte une empreinte d'Impression ou d'illustration et en terminant par la dernlAre page qui comporte une telle empreinte. The last recorded frame on each microfiche shall contain the symbol — ^- (meaning "CON- TINUED"), or the symbol V (meaning "END"), whichever applies. Un des symboles sulvants apparaftra sur la dernlAre image de cheque microfiche, selon le cas: le symbols — ► signifle "A SUiVRE", le symbols V signifle "FIN ". IMaps, plates, charts, etc., may be filmed at different reduction ratios. Those too large to be entirely included in one exposure are filmed beginning in the upper left hand corner, left to right and top to bottom, as many frames as required. The following diagrams illustrate the method: Les cartes, planches, tableaux, etc., peuvent Atre filmte i des taux de rMuction diffArents. Lorsque le document est trop grand pour Atre reproduit en un seui ciichA, il est film* * partir de Tangle supArieur gauche, de gauche A droite. et de haut en has. en prenant ie nombre d'images nicessaire. Les diagrammes sulvants illustrent la mithode. 12 3 1 2 3 4 5 6 •i^O ^.■fej PROCEEDINGS AND DISCUSS SIGNS OOSHECTJIO WITH THE IXTROOl" CTios or A BILL I» THB.DIOCESJ OF NOVA SCOTIA, ' *MD OTHER PAPERS RELATING THERETO. HALIFAX, N. S. I'WNm BY JAMES BaWBS AND SONS 1864. :*»; i^ /I- t w ■ '"■£ lli ''-i ;-i-->* TO THE READER, connected therewith m would be ncceLrv »„ l • f"'"" delay he i, now enabled t„ prclrthe Z ' "'1'°^' """ ""'■'• Ch„.K.en in pa«.n,a. an'd Z^l^'^^Zr' '"' ''™" "' w.n-^L';':^: t^r-"- ''"» ^- — ^^. ci.n„..anee, .-e. Halifax, March 31^ 1864, WiLLIAK T. ToWKSEJfD. 11 !-.='L>v' ^^J !^iU>- .^■r EXPLANATORY. • •J mitlccsof M^hlTcslf th" h •?' '".'"TPO-'of l'i» Bill boforo cou,. Churchmen to employ cLLtu? '"?'," ""' '^''"'"^ '^ " »™l«' "f •gainst the Bill aSd on InerVZ ""^l'" "',° f','i'°" "'' *' «'»'e«'' •'"i* Pio.inee to oplse ,ho b1 'nHI^^ °? [^ °' ""' Churehmen of the ^..1. .p.„ed^a% pHn^e?^ pCt Ltr ^tL- -Sro^J^hntl" .g.i™tT|Jltlfhtt1tU^dreStar,f'' ''■•'^^■"''' *™" »'- I-"'- would be ™fBoie„M " i 't tiS TL''R:r °'r1,'- «r'«"> P"™' ;sfit^'diri£~^^^^^ This is to be re.,^ttedT, tt rm„ °f ; ■"'' "",'' """"'«" "'"<' « reeorded. -co to vote ^gai„rhe°Br„° h";it'tuC »r„t" "•''= "^^P^"^' rea«)ns hereafter cxnlalno^ tlin ft ' . "^° generally understood {on House was a fore^nfcllusion P""«"' '' ^'^^ ^"' '^''^^^ *^« Lower coni^tS'li^;:;! s tb:^£ ^^tt ^^t^ ^^ f ^^^^ *^ ^ -^-* the Hon. H. G Pineo all 011?;.. t ''"' ^^''"- '^"''» Creighton, and the Bill. ' "" ^^'^"^^{^•i^en, who reported unanimously against ' oouS:rgSirnUVt;S" \'^^ ^-^^"""'"^^ «f '''^ ^^«'»tive ' by a large na™ber o } cit."en and a "^L*^'*"'.'' '''''T^: ^' ^«« ««^nded the subject was fully debated tLV ^''^^' "" ^^'^ ^''^^^ '^i" t««tify. J ruuy debated. The discussiou commenced on March 23rd. , I'l '..if v^.l rU..^H u\i? 6 Tlio icconl of flic (lcl,;it(. l.i'fon" tlio Cuminidco of dhinfil i.s not ki'pt for ttny factions or iinproii.^r nnifivcs, Imt ;is ;i rcconl of ihc art^iiiiii'uts ufcA on holli nidcs, f„r the information of tlio wliolc liMily of Cliiinliuion in llio I'roviiico. Facts were elicited in tliat, di.Mras.sion tliat every Clmrchnian ou2;ht to know, wlietlicr tliey tcfl in favor of or a;raiu-t liis o\vm pei-uliar views. My lull, fair, and open discussion only, can we arrive at the triitli, and facts once elicited onj^Iif not to lie lost. After the conclusion of the di-eussinn before tlii' Coniniltteo of Tonneil. tlic Hill was put liefore the llonse. when, after sixMclie., from .-evi'ral nieiri- liors. t!ie IMl was lost, — sixteen voting a;:;ainst it, inchidinir all tiie Church- inen. — and four votin;^' for it, three of whom wt r(> di-.-eiiteis, and one a Konian Catliolic. The vote wa.s taken on the 2.Slh .>Iarch, and tlio division was a.s follows : Against Ifon. Jame.j McXah. Prrs/»/f(riitn. •' .f. IJ. Anderson, Mrllimligf. " T. I). Arehiliald. Prrshytcrian. " H. (}. I*inei). ChiirrlrtiKin. '• A. F. Oonieau, liom.Cutltolir. *' W. C. Whitman. Methodist. " R. H Diekey, Churrhman. " M. B. Almon, ]Jo. Tnio IJlLL. Hon. A. Patterson. /^reitfi)//frian V. Tu|i[icr, ('"/ii/n (/nfiunnlisf. " V. Dickie, J'nylnihTian. " Wm. A. Black. \]hlhn,list. " ^Mex. Koltli, I'reshi/d-riaii. " K. 31. Cutler. Clunr/nnatt. " Wm. IMeKcen, J'nsbutcri'an. " John Holmes, Wo. Foil Tii'.; IJii.i,. Ifon. Jon. McCnlly, Dnp/isf. I Hon. S. Brown. Cun'jregailonnUst. " II. A. JMtrHefTey, Prcshytcrla,,. \ " K. Kenny, Roman Catholic. Ilyn. John Crcigliton, one of the Coniinitteo that reported against tho Bill, was absont at the time of the division.- His vote would nuke seven- tAjen against tho Bill, in.^tead of .sixteen, as reported. The division in the Lower House was of cour.se taken lu'fore the discus- 8ion before tho'comniittco of Council took place, and a general election wa.s 4)cfore their eyes, and, aa was generally believed, many" were influenced in their votes by expected support in tho clceiion.s. .shortly to take place. Tho members of the Council were not influenced by any electioneering conaidera- tions, and were, therefore, in a position to give an independent vote. It is but fair to state here, that (several nienibens (-f the Jjower House * a.sserted, after they had heanl the argument.s before tlie Connnit'ioe of Coun- cil, tliat they would not have supported tho Bill had they heard the argu- ments before voting. They admitted that they had nut comprehended the scope of the Bill, nor the power it gave. * Comparisons having been drawn of tho manner in which the .subject was handled by Bi.shop Biunoy and Mr. Ritchie, (^the arguments wi'l speak for t^J?;&i r-..' wiK.r.:::'M;''i;i,:„^;,,r;;:;;\: ■;,;:: ^■:,;'''v"'''> >■- ^i-' i-. '- .•ii.s.si..ri. ^ '"•^") ''-O^ t" prcpaio f,.r tlio di.s- 'ri.o*J.KMm.ont.sarKl .lisn,,-.!.,,,. a.v airan;,...,! i„ ,1., •'."•.I and took place, as t;,ll„w.s CIllt.T ti.ey caiiic t<» IJill r-resonfojl to flu, Logislatur. I.y Uy,,,,, Hinpoy. '.■IUl,at„„.,„.roJu«dl,y „.„,„., „„„„,„„, „„,, „,, |,^,^,„j ^. ^^ ^^^^^^^ 'il * --- BILL INTRODUCE. BV BISHOP mm INTO THE LEGISLATURE. BILI FOR THE LVcoRPORATION OP THE DIOCESAN SV.NOD. 4Lf "d1..Sltv^Srt5 So i^"^' ^^'^ ^^"'^^^ Church of ^^ . Wheroas doubts exk ^J^^^ 'J,^"" '°'''''^^^^ Un.tcd Church of E„,/,and and ire ndTnU.L'p"^''"^^^ the mornbor. of the regulatm^ the affairs of thoir Churcr n ""',,^^«^"?c«. '''^vo the power of «ecc«sary to order and good Ave nto^lt "nTf •" '^'f "« '« '^''^^''p''"^ ^"d be removed, in order ihtt they maTen w t^ "J"' ^^^ ™^'' ^^«'^''^« «''ould that are exe..i.sed by other re^gtuVSu^i.r' "''"^ '' -If-government r^Tt''lj° 't ^'nacted, kl. &c. '' " England ^TrJLJlr^;^^^; "c.f 'T'*^' ?"'*^^ C^"-'' «f fiuch proceedings as they shall adonf fJ ^ ' '"'^ '" ^'"^''^ "manner and bv lations for enforcing di4ln in thlcirh ? ?r'^"''""' ^"^ '"^^e re^ or remova of any ?erson bearinVoLe th^-^ i'\"^'^'"^ Jeprivati^ any nghts of the Crown to the er^f^ ' -"f ''^"*''^^'' ^^'^r «^ degree ve^^ient and orderly mana^Vent ofTir «"^ ^^ ^^^^ «on- Church, in matters^elatinf to anlSTl f'*^^^ '"'^''^^^^ o^ the officers and members thereof, ^ Jnot in "fn^ ^ '^" '"'^ ^'^"'•^''' «"d the nghts. prnnleges, or interest;, of arypLHr ^'"^ interfering with the or members of the said United Church ofVn K"' Tt ^''"« ^ '"^"^b^r tha nothing in the said constitut^mTrroll!^^^"'* '"'* ^'"^^""'^ ' Provided r ffin -^ W or statute whiJLls S't t:K£i/ 1„ ^ ^ -d untif^SfS:^;^^^ AcUh^^^^^^ -t by representation, eommun,cants of the Church of EnXnd ^ml /" >' ^^« ^^^-^g^^^-^. t^ing Easter Meetmgs in each Parish Mi^sfon ^ r^ ^\?^^^^^d at the annn^ meetmgs to be specially called for tei^-nn T ^'^t'^^^^''^ Province, or at «^parate Cure of souls V^V'^l ^i'"" V^^V^^o hy each Clergyman having* Cure.ofthefulfaTe of ttenty no T'" ^[**^'\^"«»^ P«"'h. MiSn ^r -ting at such meeting. X'^ed sft^ot^K^ii-^- .f^--^ve"s b •■ -"-"uiaa ineieof, to be y.. • • •! , ' t V .,'A' "V 10 mcinlifrs of (lie Uiiitcil r}uii(!h of Eiir^huid ami Treliiid, ami to ljolon;T to ?)o o'Jicr ri'ligiiius (li'iiuiiiiiirition, shall have tliu ri^lit to voto at such oli'L-tion. The tir>t iiiectiiig of the Sjiiod to ho hi-lil uikUt thi.s Act shall ho (-ailed by the Bishop, at such time ami place !>.s he sluill think lit. provitli.Hl tliat notice of his intention shall have boon ^von to cacli -_'li'r<;yn!an having a separate Cure within this Piovipco, not less than tlnee calendar months previous to tlie day appointed for the meeting, in order that there may he sufficient time for the election of lay representatives. III. — The Synod constituted as aforesaid, consi.sting of the liisliop, Clergy, and rujirc.-. ntativcs of the laity, of the United Church of Kngl.iiid and Ireland within this ]*rovim-e, shall he a L -dy p.iditic and c; ij'Mate, having perpetual succession hy the name of iho " V'-'^'i^'^'^in Synod ut' Nov , Scotia." s^i 1^ .». AMLWDED BILL, AS PASSED IN THE LOWER HOUSE, BET THKOWX OUT BV THE COUXriL. '.'■ i?^':^^i ^::rf:::^;;;:;^::^:;::'-;-'''^ '^y^sv,:,, .m. i-mu.., r,....,. and ncco...ary to or.l.r an.l 'o „1 • . , "f ^..-.s n.la.i,,. to dis,.iplin.., follows: ''^ '^^^ (-.ovorrior, Coi.nril, a,ul A.^eiubly, a.s Kugi;.,! 'n.l'S;,n;;''a-i;7wni!r ;""''"" "''*''^^ ^'"'^^"^ ^'-rch of make regulations fo.e,!^on.i,*':^.:-;-i;t';' ?;'"" f -""^'i"' .aid nnirJ^l'^/, ;;;;:; \-'-^"-^ -'"'-^ -•-! "- -id llnit.^^ M.tHl.on or regulations or any of 1 , t. f.n 1 °'''''''- ^ "'^' '"•'»''' ^'"n- Manue Ml,;,.h is now or bereafter 1 . i •' ''""^'■'"">' ^^' '"'^ i'^^v or •^l.ail alfeet or eontrol any p ,n ,- v ! - ' '." "'"' '" '^'-^ ^''■•^^■"^^•'N (or -.rdens and ^ estry of -JjCI C ZUTT'' ''""''''' '" "'^- ^'''-'^^ ^^'"» t''^- nVbls or privile^i.s no vo L'' ''' T^""'''^ ''' '"••^••fl''-e -voral parisbes o/i.onnnatini o^- , ■ sj u ' , ^;;: '" '''^^ l--^''--- of .b„ ••I'oose for fbeir Minister or P:ee(or.) ^ ^' " ^''''''''' "■''^"" tl'oy may 2. tortile purposes of tbis A,.( tl,n T •. i „ !'-'-, an.l until it sllall be o,l'!!,.±! !l".^:"l>' ^''^'H '"oct by representa- '"■".- eonmnuiieants of tbe Clnireb oVFrnri''''!' ""'' '"' "'" '''■'^^^ates, t m', '' It t. ' * /.I «» • t^ ' «.-:? .■ ''Vi 1- ;? •!','■■' 12 vince, or at meetings to bo specially called for the purpose by each clergyman having a separate cure of souls ; and all laymen within such Parish, Mission, or Cure, of the full age of twenty-one years, ^vho shall declare themselves in writing at such meeting, if required so to do by the Chairman thereof, to be members of the United Church of England and Ireland, and to belong to no other religious denomination, shall havo Ac right to vote at such election. The first meeting of the Synod to be held under this Act shall be called by the Bishop, at such time and place as lie shall think fit, provided that notice of his intention shall have been given to each clergyman having a separate Cure within this Province not less than three calendar months previous to the day appointed for the .neeting, in order that there may be sutlioient time for the election ol the lay representatives. 3. The Synod constituted as aforesaid, consisting of the Bishop, Clergy, and representatives of llie Laity, of the United Charch of Eng- land and Ireland within this Province, shjill he a body politic and corpo- rate, having perpetual succession by the name of " The Diocesan Syno•'" r» ' is ■ i *' .i ' r "J u Tiiiit in pctitioiiinp; asjaiust the adoption of thi,^ law, your petitionorj- feel bounil to state, as clearly as possible, thvir reasons for sc doing, to your Iloniirable House. Pirat — They believe that the Bishop, by the authority conferred upon iiim as Bisiiop of the Anglican Church, has full power to regulate and nianiigc the order and discipline of the Church over which he pre- sides, and has suHicient aitthority vested in linnself, for the government of his Clergy, so far as at any time may be necessary ; while the Clerg>' themselves iiave for their general guidance the Constitution and Laws ot the Church, which have existed since the Reformation. Tliat the power to regulate ^heir own internal affairs, is fully recog- nized to exist among all denominations of Christians in this country. But we believe that none of them have asked at the hands of the Legisla- ♦are the sanction to form Courts, and compel obedience to tlie acts of such Courts, hy the strong arm of the law. No such power is enjoyed by any den«nniiiation of Christians in England, and the introduction of Ecclesiastical Courts, sanctioned by lav:, for the trial of ministers and other orticers of the Church in the Colonics, would, in the opinion of your petitioners, lead to much trouble and suffering, and have alway;* been resisted on this side of the Atlantic by the representatives of the people. '■'' rond — Because by the 9f!i Bye-Law of this Church Assembly, passed in 185.") an unqualified veto on all proceedings of such Assembly, Avas- conferred upon the Bishop, who, under the regulations then estab- lished by that Body, was to sit as Chairman in the same room -with both the Clergy and Lay delegates, and have the privilege of answering every speaker successively, aud thus control the proceedings of the meeting. And should any measure receive the unanimous sanction of both Clergy and Laity present, he, ' Asse^' priyiJeges. "'"'*^^*' ^°'""«t ^r conflict with parochial r r^^^i^^^^^^^ '\^ PJ'vjIege ofuonnnating -eh parish, by the laws of thisP;o , " e iTuhe ir ^ P-i^hioner. of tohceaseand institute the oer-on ^T^. • / ? ^^'.'''''P ^^"»«' '"e^"^ reasons in writing tor such refu,;? tV?T"^'"^ ^'^'hout giying hi« m.ght be swept a^^ay from the peoDle^fl ''7 '"^P''''^^"^ P'-'W uow before the House: which in oermit in T''" P^^'/f''^^ ^^ ^h« '^"^ '•^0 r, ,7„/«,e a// mailers conlctl^l SI. ^ ^ ^Jnod or Church Assembly the Church" might lay the foun da Jnn f ^''^'1^' "•^«"''^' ""'^ "'^«-^«^^ <>/ uaUy interfere with tlc:nZfonZ^^^^^ --il and upon which the support of tho ri *'^^'^ap'e from local sources, would mainly depend, nn7 yfulU llS eSr,,"' *'" different ' parishe uponaparislMvh'ollyaistastef^Jltot p^^^^^^^^^^ ^^ ''^'^ ^ ^^--^r This your petitioners consider to be a LttPr of ., ^oncernto the interests of the Church of Tn 7 f }^'\'^^^y highest because under the specious pretexVof a DioL?^« ""^ ,'° **"« Proyince, which the Laity ai'e repres'ntd by dde:S\hrS' T "^'^^"^ ^"■ might obtain to a yery great extern ^t^^^^T ^ ^^o Bishop and Clergy claimed by the people."^ And ytur pet 011^^^ °' '''' ^'^"^'^ "«- this .core, haying been inform"7tlat T» ^'T^ ^'P^'"''""''"" «" Canada, constituted under a law omelh.t "'? ^'"'""^^y "^ Upper your Honorable House, haye ^ely aTsTm^ tZ' '^ '^ '^''' """ ^''^^^ berate yote handed oyer the ^vhnZr.T . P'"''*'''' '""• by a doli- their Bishop, who soo^'X orcedCTtS o the Diocese (Oni.rio) to a arge and influential parish, TcierCnIn ^ T'' P'^'P'^ «*' Kingston, wishes of the parishioners. ^'^'^^y'"^". '« direct opposition to the ^^^^'^^a:r^l:l'i':J'!^ f""- r ^'''^•""- - ^^e same only of replying to IS sneaked wh'^fn' ""^^ 'f^''"^' ^'^^ P«^v-«r not placing his. 4 upon any ^oco din^' whicr'n -'m' ""'''''^^ ^"^ «'«« ^f does, ,n the opinion of /oifr pet tioners re^^^^^^ r' *^ ^«•^^'"^'^' less independent body than it should h!' a '' ^'•"''■^'' Assembly a mUnn^Au,, .y- _- , •'^ :. " 8»ould be, and was one of th» -^ ^.^^-- - -. .^ the ..ctropoiuau parishes tor refusing to joiniullTd^E:. ■(f.. Uill :V kS^- ■It '' »^. ^:-*^ir. 16 That the establishment of a legal Ecclesiastical Court, to enable the Bishop, and Clergy, and such portion of the Laity as raay there be re- presented, to carry their decrees in force by the strong arm of the law, Twould be too much authority to place in the hands of any Denomination, and is a power not asked for or enjoyed by any other body of Christiana in Nova Scotia. In making this strong remonstrance, we do not wish to cast any im- proper or unworthy suspicions upon our Bishop and his Clergy, for whom we entertain the greatest respect and esteem. But we feel bound on the part of the laity to lift up our voice against placing such power in the hands of any body of men, however honorable, high-minded or good- intentioned. And we feel persuaded that when the full scope of this Bill is understood by the House, those influential and leading members who have favored its introduction under the impression that it was conferring a boon upon the people, will hesitate in permitting it to go into a law, without the most mature consideration, and such necessary restrictions and saving clauses by which the vested rights of property and other privileges already referred to, now enjoyed by the people, raay not be put in jeopardy. Your petitioners feel that their individual rights, and those of the Laity of Nova Scotia at large, are safe in the hands of their Represen- tatives, and beg most respectfully that your Honorable House will be pleased to permit them to be he&rd by Counsel at your bar, on this sub- ject, as well for themselves as for those country parishes, who your memorialists understand, also intend petitioning your Honorable House on this subject. And that your Honorable House will not pass this Bill in its present form; or at least exempt the parish and congregation, whom we, in our corporate capacity represent, from the operation of 3atd Act. And your petitioners, as in duty bound, will ever pray. h ' 'U tHOiVOGRAPHIC REPORT OF SPEECHES, BKFDRE THE SELECT COMMITTKE OF THE LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL, ON THE CHURCH SYx\OD BILL. .i' L' t-. »ri n :. . Monday, March 23, 1863. The Committee met at the Council Chamber at lOA ..m. Hon Mr. Almon, Chairman of the Committee, .stated that he had received a note from his Lordship the Bi.shop (Bimiey) reqSin' tha in^ ^i^rrn?'^"'' "" -''-' -'^' '- ''^^ - opporVunro? appltr! • ' ^u i^.-^*'^-' ^•^•' ^o'' ^''« petitioners against it. Ihe Bishop objected to Mr. Ritchie being heard at all, but the Con, Tei-r fit *:,'.!■" '""'' ^« '-'^"^ - "'"■"'■ *e Bil;^or Mr. RITCHIE'S FIRST SPKECH. Hela.^!d'th/?v\^*^'^'"''r'*/^'' Committee at considerable length. lie chaiged the Bishop and advocates of the BUI with an attemnr to ^ake .mportant changes in the Church of England in this Pi^viZ i^ ^position o the wishes of those whose views he represented, and manv Tow'exi;'^ ' ''^"°'""' ''' ^""''? "^" "«^« ^-^-' with it n The Bishop not lofig since opposed the parishioners of St. Paul's aZ^:i T^P ''^ k"'^'" ^'' '" '^^^^"'••^ '^''^ "^ht to elect their own Omirman of Parish Meetings, and his argument then was, - Thew people are members of the Church of Eu^land ; do not change the rS ?Mn n Tl iT ' '^'^u"" ""' '•'^^ ^* •' •■^' l«t them leave it." He r in sanctity to other members of the Church, or in soundness of doctrine. It did not follow that a private member of the Chureh might not be a hctter man than a Bishop. The Bishop was simply a priest of the Church, and an overseer, and no one desired to take from him the authority which the office conferred on him. He mi-^ht say to the petitioner, the Rev. Mr. Uniacke, ." I do not like your 'doctrines, and I will suspend you." Would Mr. Uniacke therefore go out of the Church or leave his Rectory ? No, he had rights as clear and defined as the Bishop himself If he deemed the doctrines he held sound and consistent with those of the Church, he could refuse to go out, and the questiin would then be decided by the Courts of the country. The Court wouH oot declare which in the opiqion of the Judges were sound doctrines, but they would decide what were the doctrines of the Church of England and whether those found fault with were consistent or not with them ' The Bishop of Exeter declared that the doctrines of the Rev Mr broreham were erroneous, an* refused to license him in his diocese' Hr. Goreham appealed, and the Courts decided that the BishOp was Wrong. " The Church people of Nova Scotia did not want a Bishop with greater or other powers than a Bishop possessed in En./land The »)mod to be legalized by this Bill would bo under the control 'of the Bishop, and subject to none of the restraints which limit the power of the Bishops m England. There would be no appeal as there, and there Jtould be noescape from its decisions but one— that of retiring from the I^"^!!!: .5^_^o™"»'«ee should remember that they were not asked to i^p.-SiSiC ridii i\iic.»iice t« tbo pnuvut ijiahop, nor the present conditioB of mm 19 ^i;ri:i5';;^:i txr- -^ -o «„« ... .h. .^d or that therefore tJuH House wo".ld Tven tu^t LT''?"'^ ^"."'^ '°«^»««' •«<* told him that 1.0 was mistaken If n^ '^ to pass it, he (Mr. R.) pre8«in.. for a Bill in wS they' Mi ^^" ^'-P'" "^ ^""'^ «*•«»'« ^rere rights involved, he (Mr RoLucvedthL ';""•'' •*"' i'**"^^* ^^eir would not obstruct them, but it would no L *-^""/^ °^ ^« C°»""' majonty, his Lordship went to A R «n^ r ^ '^'^''"° ^" o^^ain this Bill," and a. maiority^f the Housing yJ°^ nl^' " ^" ^"^e for my little, whether it^assod or not, yie Jed to hi'^" ^^"■^^T"' ^^o cared hardly refus., especially when he would imnrr'^"'*"' T*"^ they could •o overburdened with power that unless Xv,%"T '^""^ *»* ^« ^^ sequences might be fatal ' relieved of some of it the con- provi.i„„,. But, "No," lidttJ^nri? ?'^1.°°°™''°''«b«™'ibyi« «»M i„ ,be S^d, "i 1^0 ^^t °L rouT"'*"' ''f''^ «P- tend to keep it there " A nnmTl ^ ^ . ""** J'"*"" "e«ks, and I in. who were s'ubser'vie"; to ITs "p l^.Ti" ^l-^".^* dir. I«y delegates) subservient to ti^^der^^^T ^^ ""[ '''^''''^'^* i^'^i^d present Synod. Now, how had thee £wl„*°^ '^'' constituted th^ wore chosen at the Easter mce'inJl fr,? i^ ' ^^''^ appointed ? IT^ey were not enough persors prt^nf rmover; f ^'T ^ ^'°^» *^^^ This, or something like it, had been th^rlL ^^'^S? *^« resolution. WM said they had to so ou tntn fho * ''''*° ** Windsor, where it •^ble them ^o eff^cT tfeir ob^ ^^ht^, ^ '''' *° "'•'"^'^"'^ "- ^ wRch was said to be overwhelming in fav^of thi^lJnr? '^^ •««"mem meetmgs, though a resolution in faVor ofX S^^-^ °°' °''^«* on the d,.tinct understanding that Ihe deWa^T """ P"«^' ^ ^^ meetmgs. But it might be asked wL? ^5 ^^""^ "'^ ^ »tteirf- i<» jerviency in the clerifal and lay m^ W f^^^^^^ '^'S f «" of the sut be had to the extraordinary contr^rST^ t 't l^^ ^ ^' '^^rence TfT' ?"^ *!*' qucstioaiould t S^We J °^ ^^^ »» ^^ Pro. ;ng to trust himself to the'£^ sTa ^fe'lSa^l^^^^^^ J"' ^'^^ «hey would not infringe his rel1gioi«^ thl ?-^' ^"^ *»« ^'^ «»»« were many persons connected w^SlhrSv^od Sf ^^J^^^- %e,t, i^ll h.8 Lordship the truth,-they did nof^lh^ ""T^^ ^^^^^ "ot P«opte, or he would not prJss thJrZ.Z\^i^lZ ^^^ *'^ ^^ ^^^ ^ tl^^peution in favor of the Bill^^S^^^ -.t ^.. .g..a u w,U.out having read it, for „ lu.^^^^^ m '»>. K^r { •.."■ '*4 •Til *.S .it^' i^-i t m^m^ .20 known that the 8(«teinpiil that similar hills had pa^H thn rx3'rislafur<* waH not corn'ct, and n^f.Trinfr to th« Acts mcntion.>«l in the pfttition a« •imilar in chararter was sinrjply dcpoption. (Mr. R. then referred to those Acts, and pointed out the disainiilaritv.) It was said that Synods and (Mmrrh CoiinciU had existed thron^h all apes. But was there over such a Couiieil as this, in whieh ono°mart could sway the whole Iwdy, and while possessing all the power, could throw all the responsihllity on the many? When a rcs<,lution was pro- posed which was distasteful to the Bishop, there could he no debjite, fof having by the constitution of the Synod the power of putting his veto on any measure, by hdwever large a iflfcjority carried, all his Lordship had to do to stop discussion wr.s to intimate hi^ opinion, for no men would be so foolish as to waste their time in diseussinjf a measure, which thev knew he would veto, and which therefore could not be passed. It WHS said that a new constitution might be framed for the Synod. No doubt, Uit It would bo framed W the same men who had framed the last, and under the same influences. The Bishop was always to be in the chair, aiul always in order, as it was e cpressed, so as to have the power of answering every person who addressed him, for the constitution provided that the Bishop or his commissary was to l>e the sole Chair- man, lie couUl leave the Chair at any time, and having left it the Synod ceased to exist, it was then denuded of power altogether All that the Bishop had to do was to say : " (ientlemen, I do not like this debate yf'. sh is going on," and if it shouhl then continue, leave the chair, and thus shut out discussion on any subject not agreeable to him- self. But suppose he remained, and nine-tenths of the Clergy, and nine- tcnths of the Laity agreed to a measure, he could still say, "^ No I will not assent to this," and thus defeat their united action. He did m>t believe that the present Bishop would exercise his control in that oWens- ive manner, but one could soon find Bishops who would ride on the very top- of their commissions, men who believed that they were always ri'^ht and every body else who differed from them was always wrou"-. " He might be asked, could this have been done by the present Synod " He turned to the present constitution and he found that it said m the eighth clause, " No vote of the Assembly shall be taken unless in the presence of at least three-fourths of those forming the quorum, with the Bishop or his commissary presidi7ig,"~in the ninth clause : " No act or resolution shall be valid which shall not have rweived the concurrent assent of the Bishop, the clergy, and the laity,"— in the thirteenth clause • " That any proposition for an akeration of the constitution, &e , if a fifccond ff»pe approved by majorities consisting of not less than two-thirds of the Clergy and Lay Delegates, and by the Bishop, shall be adopted " It had been said m answer to objections, that this Synod was in the tJhurch what the Parliament wag in the State,— there was the OuA«.n 21 member n. he .p„kr, coulii s w n n^ " J«»^«t«, »o as to reply to each People ta.Ml...,nr,//y,.„, lilK-rtV Zs Vs dZ'"''"^"':"''' *'"^^ ♦'»'"' *'-^- others. "^ "''^•>' '^*'» a« #ir, a.s cjViV liberty w»8 to It Was true there were f.'Iiiirr.l. r i • . re.^ult did not alwav. M.o ! Tl ,.W^^^^^^^^^^^ ance with «o.ne of tUr ini,, it, V de . "'''' "?'' ^'''' """-'ompli. -^'ake. A ..ertain elass i„ K ^ n7n'\r"'^'' '""' '''^'''''<^ «' the -ore pre«.iu. for Synod. « C o alio n h' '""^' /'-^««t"nt portion , P«oplo of En,d«„d knew enou'l. , SV. o • '"-'•'^V^'^''^"' «»^'^eH«. The i.'oin, a..d we had better follow h.-'. "^;:^^"'>'"« ^o do without ^-Lop there in hi« wild... o„h ^ft , ! "^ "" ^^'«'"^P "'• Arch- ^yaod had giver, to our IJi. Z nuld\,ever be ah .p .u ""'''■ '^''"'^ ««"''titu. Ii'Hl.op,~thHt was one of it pVov sicn ' /' ^''"' '''' ^""^'^"^ "^ the "ver; u„le8« a iJi^hop was found who wa, , '""•'^,':^"'"'^"^ vvstablished for self of power. Po.L i.s sw t mo^t ' en ' 7'"'"^'.^^ '''"P"''^"'^'' »•"«- Hcclesiastics Iha.i to others. lie waT now ' '^'"[ P^^^^^^lv not less so f pics, aud not pointing at the present Bis I '''n "P .''^ "^''^^'"'^^ P"»«'- •natter of great importance.'^ He wa 1^' , "' t^ ^''' '^"'^ ^** ^^ » re hgK>us privileges in the power of any liv n'^ «• f "' '"'^ ^'•^" *>^ I here were in the Chureh' of En^amfperlZ ^^'^ ^''''°P ""' f^"^'"*"- testant views, — others wbos. .»••' ^'^'^ ''«'** peculiarly Pro- TMs Bill would givrtf;:;:;;x;"o\vV;;^^^ ^" :i!« '^'- -^-" There might be a minority of C'luuul ^ f • ^^•^P'-""'"^ the minority, what were calle.l evan4Lu v^ews T'^'lf '". ''"'" ^'•"^•'"'^«' folding those who held those r^Z^:^::::;^:!':^^^. •' d'^i -^t follow tha^ to value more highly J^er^o^^^'^'^^'f^^^^'^y^^^ vews, and l.id greatest/ess on Ltw^ "forZ J^fer "'" ''"'' ^''P^^'^^ i II and assuming the latter to have n^fI.''"?'^'''-P"«8 the Bill and assuming the latter tnimVl'"""" ^"" ^'^'"^'"^"'^'^'—pass the ojhers could all be-'expell The CW^^ ^^« «^»-^ the ' any control r:l^^!.:"''l',* ^^^'^How is that? Wd it not? Not This n;u J ; .i'''"''- J^"e uomn -lenders. When the , 'o^se was tSd^^h f ,,''" *""' ^^ eccIesLfrca •>^tablishaCV,.rt,they wee,/,Xw'l. / "'"' "^'^^ °° '"tention to t^> form a Comt, and his Lord h . ^tfld no't d'""-:^* rl' "'^^ ^"^'^^^^^ passed, a Court wonbl h. f.„.. "i'!. ?"'^ ^?*' ^^^ »t. If this Bill we«. 4nd it was said even the Bishop himsdlT^'TZ ^c^'"'? ^°^ clergymen, '■^'ihi to do this, and they would e^rcise it ^ ^""'^ ^''"^'^ '"*^« the I 1'^; '.■5* •' ■ '"L < ".1 ;''^ i'''i ;1< t/,i € o ■|hmA«|_* .■r'* ^ .^8(* - 22 There wa» no necessity for the chnnpro now soii>,'ht, and while F^I«- siastuail Conrta in Enjifland wi-re suhjif t to appeiil, this was to be final and conclusive, that whon sentence was passed there, that sentence could never be appealed from. A large body— Re won Id not say the best, hot certainly not the worst portion of the Church of Knglaiid— the Kn-dieh Non-conformists— were for^l out of the Church in limes j;oh(! by, by means not half so powerful as tliis. There wouhl be Non-couformists in Nova Scotia l>efore long if this measure passed. However good Church- men they might be, forms and ceremonies, and novelties of all kind? could be sanctioned by it, and all made to c(,nform, or be compelled to leave, and clergymen to suft'er deprivation, if nothing vorse. In the paper published by the party who advocate the Bill— which they call a Church paper— he had seen a series ot letters on the dreaa of the Chrgy. It was said thar it was absurd that a Clergvmau should appear m the pulpit in a black gown, that he should ahvavs appear in white. Some might think tliis a small matter. Jlut the importance of It was seen, when it was stated that while dressed in the white surplice the Clergyman was speaking the language of the Church, and that he put on the black gown when he went into tlie pulpit simply as on** Chnstian exhorting his fellow Christians. Those who desired thaf the Clergyman should always wear the surplice, in fact said. Let the Cler- gyman in the pulpit speak authoiitatively,— let him continue to speak there the language of the Church,— let him speak there with an autho- rity that men must obey. There was unfortunately enough to be seen in the Church of Eng- land to show not only that a man might be a minister and be a bad man. but that he might be a Bishoj) and be a bad man, and doctrines not always the same may be hesfrd from the pulpit. Therefore the Church did not recognize as her language any thing that every preacher might say from the pulpit. The Synod might decree that we must have uni- formity in our Church. As regards the Communion Service, it might be said that it was a synall matter whether there were two tables or one; the petitioner (the Rev. Mr. Uniackc) migiit think otherwise. There were certain things in which the Cluirch of ETiglund differed from the Roman Catholic Church. The Chun-h of England holds that no change takes place in any of the elements. — that^doclrine she adopted at the Reformation. But a party in the Ciiurch of England do ronsider that certain changes take place. Some call it transubstantiation, — otherfi call it consubstantiation, — that on the one table tlie elements are bread and wine, when placed on the other table -Homdhinff else. Fancy Mr. Uniacke forced to have these two tables and recogni/e this doctrine, and be told that if he does not do so, he will be tried, and articles of impeach- ment preferred against him before an EcclesifHfical Court! At nresent iU „ \siii.j lu rOiiiOVC; jJil". UUiuCKt.-, tVitiiOUl good ■ P«M ^^^ft .'», 23 ^^^.^^^'Z^rr !"■- '^"PPO-e that a „.ajorit, account bcfon. «n Kcolosias ioft7rZ; ^^ was bro..j;ht upon that of Kxeter Ho JnZiT • ' '^'"' '"=''' *'«^« ^'''e "'e Bishop -o 5- l^rS^uni'"!' Fr^';?- '■T"-'^'^ ^T- ^o^- the^ Bishop, tion that ever ramo Mb ^Thif IT "'"I^'^^'V- ""* "'^ '^'^"«™'°^ ment ofifs own to inapt 1„ , • "f ^^^ '''''*^*^ *" have a parlia. of the Supreme ^o Hof ?n r'T ""l Y'IT '"•""« hin.lin,Mhan those that the a^r" would do tT^'!'"^'"-^' "' /''« I'-'^vinee. It migj.t be said t-^, the/^^^u.:,;:!;! ,; irt :;! ' "„f ^ ^r'"- ""^ ^^'^ ^^^^^ tion of the Synod wn.,1,l ui J u . ) •'• ^^e present Const tu- <-ouId not havelrS™ r Th '^ ""''! •*^'' "^ ""'''"' -"^titutioa The Laitv tereXhird in tJ.o s'' ","k ""'^""^ ^'^' '"^'''•""^^ '^hout it. them,_witho.a tJ^m rV"o W noTr^^^^^ "Z ""^ V^ '" '"'^^^ «' power was taken from thL. "" J'"'' ' ^"' "" ^«^"^ St ri ^r'"''"'' '^"'' "thers hnd said that the people, of St Paul's an^ St. treorwe .s were nttemnti'nrr »,. t^ i i " . 7 "' '^*^' ^au» s ana people-of Nova ^Scof^' »;',"',"'■'"",''''' "«'"" "'' "« "■""* ll.ey mi,. ,„b,„i,. I will l„v,. 'r^,",,''.. V.''''.'i.l'^?'"».'' »' ."«>' "Sreed, I M I-,' .> *• 24 ft vnanhnottH application for il," iiiul lu-, (Mr. R.) would ask liiin if titer© was more unaniiuily now. with respect to the Synod, limn there was then. Let his Lordsliip test it by insertinj; tlie proposed clause. The parisliioners of St. Paul's found— after they had resolved that they wouhl not heeonie parties to the Synod, of be bound bv its acts that their curates were attending,' tjie "nieetiu-rs, and, ac they tl.ou^dit, coinproniisin^r the j)Hrish. They a.;cordiu^ly said to those •lentlem'en : If you insi,:t on attt-ndinj: the Synod, and carrviu;; out its decrees in the I)arish, we will dispense with your services. "The IJishop in the letter to which he (Mr. li.) had alluded, staled that every cler^rymau was "bound by a solemn oath to obey his Bishop in all thing's lawful and honest." The oatii referred to will bear no such construction as that put upon it by his Lordsliip; but it is euouoh to show the want of inde- pendence in the deriry when he and some of them, such as the two he alfuded to. considered that it did. We all took the oath of allegiance to the C^ueen, but that did not ;rive her Majesty the ri^rht to implicit obedience in all thin^rs. xiiat oath obviously meknt obe.lience in those matters only uhich flw Qaen, han o ri,j!,t to rummand ami the laws enjoin. A Clerofyman is bound to obey his Bishop when directed bv him to per- form the duties of his oiliee and carry out the rules of^he" Church ; but «t he is bound under oath to do whatever his Bishop orders him, pro- vided it is not unlawful and dishonest, he is notliin Jncil caUSetl llilU tO uiter that 0|)iuion, 25 Exeter '"V^rr^^' "^^ *^"^ Con),nitt.e, or th. Eisl.op of London, o of any suui iiill as tliat U-foru tlu- loiise, II.- di,} not «-a,.f ti... r\ ..ve up any of their rights. He .11.1 n^t ^tt '1.^ J^ho > ^^""^ ^ attack the n.omlKTs of the- Church through the Clcr" ^ ''^'^ '"^ (Mr Kitdno h.,,-.. rcfcrre.l to the case of Dr.lflellmuth -m Fvnn ^du-al C ergyman in the .lio..ese of Huron, who ha.l 1..^^ ^ u.:^ ^Z most v.olent n.anoer. l.y the Bishop of Montreal, hecaus,. h had "ucd a a pubhc n.eet,u,,. ,n Kn,Han.l, that in notne of the dio,-ese.s ui^^^^ iiot re::^;:'r;-rr'^ -n "^ tz ^^-^^^^ ^'--^y-en, that "l^'i^^um Dr n.Zn 1 w^ ^'" •"'^^t''*'^!"^^-^^ ^^fthe lJi.hop\s staten.eut/agaiu,.t tha nfll \ , ^ ■'^^''^^'r"''' *'^' ^^''^''''^''- '^y the Bishop's induence or hat of he Synod, for they have a Synod there, thev have but two or 'hreo Ksan^.el,calC!er;,ymeni„th.: diocese, for tlie Bi;hop o^ til st^.n 'nt Kj.n.. retterated in Cana.la had retorte.l hv pointing /i t /L- Fv m- X^^^ Cler.vn,en tn the whole diocese who had' not been xc u 1 .1 ? .7^ ' t Ontrdo ?l" Tf '" ''" :"■"'"■■ l"''"''^ '■" ^'--l--^' 'l-t in the d . CO e o Oatano the B,slu>p wa.s charjre.l with haviu..^ promised the best parhh .a he diocese to a clei-ynuu, who had been -^erv a.-tive in c' n x nff.r him in the contest {.)r th." lil.hooric 'I'l... Bi"h^ i ''''\\^^^'^^, h.)p ha.l accordniirv ''ivcD him the parish ot kin^r,t„„. apiinst the wishes-net simplv of a maunHy mt, It would seem of the .-hoh parish., Char-n.s were pn-hUe. a- ainst' he clergyman by the parishion...rs, ami a lonj, con, rover y endued "iC Bishop hnally j^ave the parties to un.lerst"and,_he (Mr R ) would not •say he promised but he led them to beli.n.', in su. l/.ern is tl o C p.cK,us man woti ,1 doubt his meanin.-that if they woul.l w dr w't^.e .'ha.jro, iwhu-hhe Inmself was involved, he would have him removl un.l atiother app.mited in his place. They .lid su. and th.. he K^.o i urned roun.1 and saul. -I'he o.dy real p..,un.l <.f obi..<,i.m yj 1 ^ t voni?i sf-'''T-'7"''''i'r-"" 7"^'" "f'- '"^^^ ""^^' ''^' •^'-" >•-»-"!" This Tdon'ra'y;;^:;!""' ^^""^ '""^ '--' '-- '- ^'--'- -• ^^•''- -uu Un-I.T all th., .inumstAices he e.uil.l not help feelin- ,hat if the irnii;,,^""" r; '^"^ '"""'""• Clnnvhnu.n that lri.>usi; , H .^ >he Bdl, tlu.y woul.l n,.t so far have foro-o„on that thev w^re Kn. is men as w.dl as Churchmeu. as to have vote.l for U I , V "j' 'l tl.at this Bill woiild ,a,l.r stren^t..: Ve:;- In :^. ' S^i^^:"' Z .:^:^ that the Bdl would l,e defeat.Ml in this House n„w, an.l he thou-dr th' It would meet with the same Into ;,. .1 ...._ t,..; .r '"^ .'"?>'^'''\ that thero. '■"'' '*""■"■•'' ^g'T'" '''iLiUueeu ;i ■ i 1 1^ * '■ » I II tr\ *|1 m^mi^^^^:Wjfm 9^ BhZ' Z^lTl^'^^ *" '^'■"'^ '^^' '^^'^ ^-"Id be no Church without a That w^rlf o? -'^^^^^ "^^^ *^" '"'^' ^"'•'" «f ^^''^"••'^h government. vZuZT , , '"T" "^ "'*'°^ °^ t^'e best Bishops of the Church of England, and hud not been since the Reformation. They thouTt tha Episcopacy was a form of Church government, authorized by the Scri^ disnose.! to ^^H ''1'"'^^ '' ^^ ^« '''' ^'''' »"^ ««™« "^ O"^ Clergy wer^ be ca !o ^,T the length of holding that Churchmen were not en^Ld [o religlou' £t^^ -J gave l!; a.) Ch mZ Jn =1; u'^''' ^''PP^' *" b« ''^'^'« t« ft'cl that he could be a thcS rT-dr ''r'^-^'-^-^ and he well knew that some Long timeut! ^- ^ "'^ "''"^' •'^'"' - '^'' ^■''''y^ entertained the same sen- nenied'; ^l'"'"' "'""/^'^^''•••^'l ^« th« Bi^l'op of (^apetown, who had s„.- parlv to e ect ll .' ,""^"'' ."^''^"'^ '''"^ '^^''" "'^^'^ ^V the Bishop's party to elect delegates who would support the v.ta p.)wer.) tionerroSSfinr?^^' "•'^' '''.' Committee,_on behalf of all the peti- of it to. Vh "'^ ""'"■"'* ^"^™«'' ^'^*1 -^hown their disapproval wo ilvot'^hr't «^;'?r '" '^'' ^'"- "« ^•^•^ ««"^'"^«J that n'o man Th n 1 ? ^'' /''''* understood the constitution of the Synod The Church people m Halifax had read it and did understand i7 and Lv^^Tir^'l'TV^'-'"'- '^''« ^'''"••<''' P-Pl^ '» th« cour'y, he be- hev H 1 " ^' " '/' '^"^•"■^' '-^"^ *''«'-«f«'-'^ •'■■J "ot oppose it, but when ellow nn?;T ""•^-■!^'-^l *•- q'^estion, they would join with Their lellow (Jiurchmeu here lu opposing it. 27 Iv. f. THE BISHOP'S FIRST SPEECH. as »i Jt^"^'^ '^' ^^''^'P '^''' ■"^'^'"^'''^ ''^« Committee substantially Kido^r'nnl\'""'^ *^' ''"^"i'"* ''"""""« «^ '''^^ 'e^'"<^urns JliCciosiastical Law .ns mifU,.;*., f... .i , . :,' •vedtiiat burns stated that J" >i-^^.J"^Z:':^^V = ^^ ,i^^^-';"'^. ^na observi iaxon times Bis! bops held their Synods » i 'I..' . ' t\ f .".1 I;'^' ■ ♦•11 • 28 twice a year ) Some .ay that Synods are no part of the constitution of our Kefcrnuwl thurch. Now what di.l the Refornif r. do ? Even in the time of Henry \ II ,t wu:^ ordered that Synods should be held regularly, and it was recouunonded that they should he hol.l in Lent. These acts were passed, and It was directed that thirty-two Coniinlssioners should he apjx.inted to con- sider lie (_anon Law, and frame one for the Reformed Church! An act was passed ,n the tune of Edwar.d VI., called • the Reformatio Leqnni The kmgs authority had been given to it, hut the act 'itself was not si-^ned hv fmn ,„ conse.iuon.e of his premature death, and therefore did not "become positive law. That act expressly provided that after the Commis.sioneji ap- pAmte,, hud reported,_ the laws which they recommended should bccomf the lawsof the Un.n-h ot Kngland. That was the order of the Reformc.l Chun-h, and It only a, cd in conseiiuence of the king's signature rot bcinir affixc^l to the act. AVe kimw what limes came after this. The Parliament assumed power, &c. Arclibishop Demiison is not a High Churchman, and he gave .£1000 that .Synods might be held ,„ the Colonies. One of the Rishons who h.dds very Low views, as they are ealled, crossed from Australia to obtain the sanction of the ( rown to a Rdl pxssed by the legislature tl)r his Synod. It was then thought that the (olnmes would go to destruction, if they were allowed to pass such acts entirely of them.^clves. ^ -Now, what is a Rishop's authority? It is said that the Rishop seeks to Have thi.s Rill passed, beeau.se he wants more power. The Canon Law was confirmod by a statute of Henry VIII. I tell the Church people of Nova beotia that very little that has passed since the Reformation binds them here — nT^^^ nf''^ f'"^tJ»f^^« »'i"'l tliem. (His Lordship here referred' to Gibsons fo'fer a, authority for this position.) All the authorities agree hat this act of Ilenry A II. ,« still in force; the general principle of law being that Lr.glishmen settling in a new Colony bring with them as much of the common law as i.s apj.licable to their state, and this not merely statute law. but what existc.l before the Canon law, for there is an ccrlesia.sh-cal common law as Avell as a ch-il common law. All the acts of I'arliament passed ^ylth reference to the Cliurch of P]ngland do not apply li-.o save and except the (.^anons of l(iO:5. Every lawyer will agree to this "A Ri>hop has alway.s power to .'suspend his Presbyters " Tiiis is the decision of tlie Chief Justi.^o of Cape Town, Judge Watermcyr. He ""held that Riwliops were by law and custom the Judges of their own C.nirLs, not only from (hurch law being the law of the knd, but from the fact of Episcopal ( hurehes having been acknowIedgefTby the Legislature This jurisdiction has been exercised since the seventh century. A Rishoj) pos^c-ses the pwors of a,f monition, suspension an-l deprivation, and this must be admittod by all Cleroynien who admit Episcopacy. Chief Justice Holt held that Clergymen wlio did not ot)ey the Canons were subject to deprivation (.His Lordship then referred to Johnson's Ee.-les Law ,.,,,1 u, .....!• j\.,.i.,." i*;^-r- 29 Council, in the e»w of Rev Mr I • ?"?'?" " """' ''"f"™ H"' Privv Tho Bishop ,,,,/rp;:do''d;„nt,h^d%-:dtin! *'"' " '"^- '-" «° t^^n in „,. L appiin'n «n. Vr^T 1°" "' "^ *' P"">S»-i»« "f tb. .. the Pr-.-o„,cn"rS7elnJ'^roYS;:'Z. I e° "'t'"''". against the K.>v. Mr. Uniaeke worn T Za- \ t ^ '''"""^' proceed require him to preach four timeJn tlv T'i ^ '^^'*^' '^ ^ '^hose, agSinst all forei|n povvers tv Sih hi. . J ' T '^'""'"^T' ^f ^'^^ ability suspension. SappS Tat Mr ITn^lT ^ T'^ """" ™' »' "'« "* of •n? '" ""^r '« "'«»» Canons, would „ J„„b,„d,, b' decides hi .ho^"P"°"' *^"-"'' "■« l-^""- Couf n,u'lr£,Uird'Vl%Ss trl?r " "°',".' '"» «™- ' Snpromo Court, a Con/ having power over Tt ■''T"""« "'"' "■» attondance of witnesses and J^ ftfrir m, ' S «"1" '','«»'r™''.j™-'=^ "- »»' beW ,0 on,, hod,, eonid fylT^SoTyZ-^T.Vi':^ ""' °°' gentlcnan beta^i g'SX Wcs L„^£LiT '"h '"^?°'*- i '^^ ""7 to their a^semhlios, what is "he Iwer of the r , f ° "''"" T '""J' »' «« prescn,,, „ha. ftcy jij „ift Z Keirt™ ^'c^S^S the rt' n'?" ^°"' Courts. You must in every association nf 'T^^^™^^^^^ »* ^ 'eir Conference rule, and re..datio„, to ^irS^^Z t ^hS'.rrfonn"'"^ ^' '"" regards Freemasons, I am told that MtPtr 1,„^^ 1^ contorm. L?en as they can apply ,o ^ef^acto".^eLt,^"^''d^„^4"'Ztt if '""■"" "'""■ lat,n,. when in that PetWo* is slated Ibatthe obw "f he RIlT '-"T'?"" the Synod the power to enforce its decrees hv ,1,?- . '1 'J ■" P'"' It 1, well kno J.ha. we can fm™ i3, oVd'ilc:'""*"™ "'"= '"'' pi/t^.Ks::L':sn"rhrwi^^ Ri>6n>h<."» the decision of the Courts' of "thai ■'f'l < •'I •I 1 '.-«*,.', 30 (Church, I apprcliond that the answer is plain that if mich Courts havo acted within their jurisdiction, their decision is Cnal." Tliat applies to all who take part in the Synod, to a Bishop as he stands without an^ Synod, or to the bynod standing as a volvntury association. I put it to any lawyer here, whether the Supreme Court has the jxnver to examine any law passed by Ae Synod as a 11 re voluntary association without any Act, and to say whether it is unreasonalilo or not. Dr. Warren, a minister among the Wcsleyans, offended them by Baying that the body was not altogether as good as it should b(.'. I should have thought that a Clergyman of our Church should not be removed merely for making such a statcuunt as tliat. Dr. Warren, however, was removed. He appealed, and the case was brought before Jiord Lyndhurst. Lord Lyndhurst in giving his decision, said: "It is said that Dr. Warren has been harshly treated. With that wo have nothing to do. Whether the jwwor of the District Committee has been duly exercised or not is a question with which we havo nothing to do. With respect to this I have no jurisdiction. A particular tribunal was established, and the question at issue was peculiarly for the decision of that tribunal — the District (yommittee. They have acted legally, whether they acted wisely, discreetly, temperately, or harshly is not for me to say." This matter is now not a mere question of a Synod Bill, but a question as to whether all the parishes in the Diocese are to be controlled by two or three parishes. I tell this Committee that of fourteen Churchmen in the Lower House, representing the popular feeling, not one voted against this Bill. It is said that tbey were entreated to vote. 1 did not entreat them. I asked them to meet together as Chutchmen. One gentleman of this Council was present at that meeting. I read both the Petition and the Bill to them. I said to them, I •wish that we should all be united in this matter. I said if there is any difference of opinion, it had better be settled among ourselves before the Bill is introduced into the House. The learned Counsel referred to a Bill introduced by the parish of St. Paul's, to apply to th« whole Province, and he says this is a similar case. In tliat case one parish a.skcd for an Act to apply to the whole Province, without giving them time to consider it. In this case nearly fifty parishes, after eight years' consideration, and having had their attention particularly directed to the matter, ask for this Bill, and yet he tells us that the cases are similar. Mr. Ritchie says that the Bishop has come and spoken to members here. [ ask you whether it is quite correct that on4|||||f your own officers, who is always bore and has every opportunity of influencing members, shouhl be the person prominent in this opposition. T appear before you only onee, but he, as your. Law Clerk, has naturally greater opportunities of influencing members Uian I have. ^ In the CardrosB case L(»ra Ivory declared that the Free Church ia So.tland was In the same position as any other Difscntini? rhnr-^J, ♦!,«♦ u. might regulate the appintment and ^epoJtion of her o^n ,?i„i«te ' mlt W .'wn judicatures, and. if the decisions of the latter do not eZ<^l fu' The remarks about Mr. Goreham and the Bishop of ExPtnr hnm nil K answered. I would take up no questionable gu/d.-wou^^ ( anons and go on under thorn. c . i wouju take the Now wo are asked why Synods arc necessary. In the first nlace I hnv« >hown you that they are no now thins I will show vm, Vut ^ • .stances have chango is itTX ^\ S"ST'"''° should be left in this position? In anotLr ca«e at S^lov .K ' S-\'^ attempted to use the fJms of law and ^0-^ aToffifn r^ %' ^^' ^""^^^ protection of law; but it was held'tSh Ts wTon.t d7n/thTTat ' ' must go and sit by himself and decide the matter I ask are the 'n ' '! *?' a position in which any large body of men should bo Ipft 9 T ^ ? obliged to the learned'couLl fo'r hi Trnj^^lt 'y%emL ^"3 ^ W 1, ^ Z^'""'. ^^n might keep his ClergJ constancy nTot wa Lr ^ We have been told thit there is no manliness, no independrnce in th« Uergymen who meet in this Synod. We are told that hpTpiZ dependent on the Bishop. nL. except a few of the de e^'t^ a^i: aThoLTf :r "" '^^ P'?^"- ^'^'"'^f '^'"^ ««•« partly p^db; S« at home but they cannot draw one sixpence of their salaries framTnmf unless the people pay their share. Some^v that ^-Svn!^^ • "®i thing but that^he^L for iti.as no! yTt an^ved,- hat'we must 12 ^^l^l haters '7 T'lT'^'P'"^'"'- ^ ^•'^"•^ ^y '^-^ the dZL ^rath^^^ what the people should exercise pressure. I think I mnv oU\r^L ir - . ..„^ .^_.^,.^„.j„. yj opiDioij, auu i speak to you m •»•; .«■■ v.; I f ' ' 'J ' ' I ' 1 i '] " J ll ' .^H 9^ rhaiThmcrt. t.ti.it tlnloss wc have Syninls in action, this Tharch will very ?00h hp in a state in which neither you nor any other jjcntlenien would like to 800 it. I hiivo hourd it statod, "some voted for your Bill heeauco they are op- posed to your Cliuirh, and they thouj^lit it would injure it." I believe that IS a lihel. At one time there was a very j;reat projudiee in this Province lipjinst the Chnreh ofifingland. but T believe that has passed away. We are but a small body, — wc eaii do nobody any hnnn. — we simply ask to have Dur riqhfs. T believe that iRenibers uf other dftioininations will be found Votinit for the bill. 1 believe after the statements made in reference to tht matter, nearly, if not every Jiu'mbcr of this hommrabic House will vote for us. 1 liave Iliiw the difficulty of dealing with this ('ommiftec. 'l^hat diffi- enlfy is ;^ot over by enabling me to eall on them as Judges. The same ob- jection as is made to this Bill has been made to progress of any kind. The same objection was made to constitutional gox'ornmqjjt. It has been said to me hero, "The poople in the country arc asleep with re',^ard to the interests of the Church, because they think that everything is hianaged by the Bishop." The Bishop is sure to be guided by some advis- ors, and the simple questinn is, ".should he have a few persons in the city, nr individuals representing the whole diocese." Under the present system, we have in truth the old Council over again. My grandfather was one of that (^j)uneil, and no doubt they did very wtdl, a.s well as they coulil, but the Country was not satisfied. The Bishop here lives in Halifax, and the country is not satisfied — whether with reason or without reason — that the "Bishop's Council should be composed ntcrely of gi^ntlemen residing in Halifax, Churchmen come here, jusi as this whole Province went to the British gov- ernment, and ask to be represented. Some say that they approve of Synods, br.t object to the veto. This is ver}- plausibl". The Whole objection amounts to this, that they consider the Synod foo powrtful. If the" Synod ha.s any power at all, it will be to dimin>- ish the power of the Bishop. 1 was a-stonished when I heard the learned Counsel tell you that the Bishop might introduce a resolution without any seconder, and pass it by hi.s own vote. He cannot of himself do one single act. 'The utmost that the Bishop can do is to say, "Gentlemen, you arc prv>eeeding too fa.st." Anybody can see that the i^'fto is simply a dragging power. --not an impelling power. He can only check the power of the Synod. The learned Counsel says that no man of any independence coh sit in this Synod. These rules are precisely the rules and sy.stem under which the first men in the respective Colonies .sit. In Anstralia, — in New Zealand, — in twelve dioee.*e?, the first men in the land sit in these Synods, Go to Canada and you find Lord Aylwin and nise gentlemen with the prefix of honourahle to their names, forming {lart of one of the Synods. I do not like to be personal, but look at the iftimes of the gentlemen who take part in our inv nno bo V f )int nn miin of indenondftnc6 Can "it there ¥ \^ .so 33 %n..ls 1,;jyo Womo so Muiol, a ,,nrt of tho rnnsfitntlon of tI,o ('l.ar-I, i„ H, not noo.l a S,no.l ; but I ^.s^^l Z^t ti^XZT^'Zl^,^'^ should 1,. soprato an far n.s p.^ihlo fnm, tl.o Stato V /t 1 1 U'T'-' was th. ojMnioa of tl.o Soorotary of State, that in m lor t rl f ' ■ K.igla.ul shoul.l he plaovMl in the sa.no ru.. tion \ 1 "''' ""' Acts shouM 1.0 passo,? ..y tl,o (^.^mii/LoJi;!;;;;;:,;"' '""^ •^--n-ation., A pa.nplilot hus boon frooly distributor li<-ro bv wlii.l, th^ i t .0 (!l.u,oh an, constantly ro.nindod of tho ovil ^.f Sy u b'^' '?• '' fon on,, that thoy are an infri..,o.nont on the supro^; y;7 Wn ''"" ft js snppsod by .„any pe.sons that Clorn'i.o.. hero -m ... I . , •,• t.os Take the case of a piols ovungolical youm. rk- . • ..^ S ^ '''".'" H.shop to bo a very nigh'churoh.na"n. The ova",. ■ .rU .. ^"P^ " wear the right kind of a night cap, or somothin"- f ,1. ^^ , ^ ""' ren.oved. Thi« is what eouhf oasil/'bo do,.o Sj' ^o ' Tlnd ^^ olf to ro.novc a riergyn.an, and ho will never forgive .no fir t" I in ^i" h..n to .rs.gn, but it was voiy unsatisfaoto.y both^to h m ar^d .nvt f if w:is not satisfic. T ° i * ""rch, Bill. More that, ono-fo^urth of 1 o ro v^^; a vx.^^^ ''f'"^ '' '^'^ k.ow their feoii„gs.-all the Vk.r^^StZ\:lytSt^''^ Rector at Shelburne is strongly in favour of the Bill ■^^'' As regards the proposed clause, I may say in the first nl.on ft . .. Co„.,n,ttee appointed by the 8y.,od to%ee *o tlTe vt-folf t P • f have no i>ower on behalf of the rhu.ch to aocopt any^ Xl Lo S •' amendment was moved in the lower House The chu.o . , i, ^'j'" .Syno.li«an.ere voluntary association, which J^mb s";?^ '"ci.u.tt join or not. I contend that it is part of the constitntin.. nf 1 nx ' ''''" that i, i, ,„or,.|y aocMon.ol „,«, ^.o,,, k,J: ZtTVf.SJ'^'- it B,»l^,„f l.a.l.„c.,oa a,., „„, a,,,,rovc „f giving „„. lS,,"7v„i™i„l= .hoy!:jecf d ir~"° ''"''°"'' " '^""^ '<• ""■" '■" -^"^ B™„™|..i, ^„, Th. «,W,„y.-Tl;ough he proposcJ a Sj„od, he rcallv ,li«,pp,«vod of Ih. Lai ^ _^ ^^ together and reject it, and thin I shall be fcee" FT., mni'ir' a-7 '""^"'"-Tf^'ne have a Synod at all. and onT wanf!!! « t:u?lJ!""> .^'^ "^^.'''^b to '- . i ■••••.-i-.i^ t,ieutu 10 uet riii of it K J« ' 'i ■/ I » 1 t '' 'tl ..*=.' ow, I wish Churchiaen to We a fair opportunity of givlnrthlh-' It. opinion on 34 nil matters cnnnocted with tlic Church. I tlicroforc took advantagft of tho Visitation yciir when ovcry MoniliiT i.s olili;;tMl to attoiitl. I sent circulars to till' Clerpy, in which I tmnl to thoni, " I trust you will cmleavour to make Mucli arran^fineiits a.s .shall ensure a di.MMissiiin of this nialtcr in a fair and imi>artial manner." The ('ler;;y and llc|tieseiitatives of the Jiaity eanii^ t.of;etlier, and it was carried by four-lifths *hcs of St. Paura and St. (leorj^e's. The parishes of Jiiverpool, Shelburne. and Yarmouth, contain some 4,li80 persons belon;!;ing to the Church. Why should two parishes in Halifa.x be heard rather than the.se three? The C/inrc/i Witness i.s not very favourable to Synods, and that accounts for every argmuent against them being found in that paper. As regards the veto, the Hishop cannot exerci.so tho right of veto for any length of time any more than the Queen can. This Synod is the most democratic as.sembly in tho Provinces, for the reproRontatives have to answer to their con.stituents at every mooting. It is true that there is no veto in the Synods in the United States, but there is a House of Bishops, which is in the same ])osition as this Council was once. The learned Coun.sel has told you that it is utterly impossible that a Bishop should wish to give up power. I reply that it is natural to every one to become very much interested in a work in which he is engaged. A Bishop having so much entrusted to him, and having heavy responsibilities, does take an interest in tho real well\\ro of the Church. I believe that this is ordinai-ily the case, — and it certainly is so with me. It may be .said that a Bishop advocating popular rights is something new. We have heard, however, even of Kings granting constitutions. I do not think that I should be wise in taking the position which Sir Colin Campbell took. I have learned a lesson from the study of history at all events. I have treated the poorest members of the Church with as much courtesy and attention — not condescension, for that is a very different thing — as the richest. There is nothing strange in this, for I have been brought up to it. From my earliest days my father has beencoustantly appealed to by every oppressed I have known him to spe^ hours and uays hunting up the oppressor. man Because I flm a Biahon I cannot throw off the feolinira which inherited T h.n thi 35 1 I ')i ^'irn'" ^'^,^<^'^" ^"•"".n'ht to hoar on jiio. I have beon told tl.nt If T .auld ra,l,or give up all c„„„„r.. »„,! .„|x,?ll„i,4 ,|m„ ll„ ,L ^ -ivosTlirahnnl • ^"'/f">' connbuted more than the rich man who .,ivos ot Ins abundance, and I rc.^jwct him accordin<'ly ln.e ad^oZef ''' ""'"«' ""' ""^ ^^"""^ bavingLived, the Committee I '1 ■ ..•51 ivfl h [^:^^ ;.^^^!^^^mk^mp?^9m^^ym^m feii'f' nfi TIIK lilSlI()l"S SKCONI) SIKKCII. '\Vii>M>t>\v, ■Mu!(>li "ir). ISd.'l,' Tin: Coininltlt'o inut iit 10 o'clock, a.m. Hi.-* Lonl'^liij) till' Hisliop ciH|iiin'(| \sliom Mr. IJitdiii' rc|)rc.si'nte(l. Mi\ Itifcliu . — '('lit' [tiirisli of St. (Jcorfff's. flh" parish ot \V ilmot, uiul luHlly. inysiir, — also iniliiciitiul persons in St. I'aul's aixl St. I.iikt^'H. His Kordsliip llicn atlilrcssctl tlic ("oniniittic snlistaiitinlly as lollows ; I rc^Tct that I had not cniphncd Counsel to coM(hi( t this ar^runicnt, but it is now loo late to instruct thcni. I have had put inli) my hands a curious document uith no name to it. (His Lordship here exhihiled a printed paper, entitled " lunuirks upon the .stuloQua; v. !:i( ts iit lasour ot the Syuod Incorporation Act.") lliv. /•'. I'litdikf. — I acknowled^p it, my Lord. The liisJmp. — I never lioard ot' this paper uiUil very recently, and I am not at all surprised that it was not sent to me,- — for it is certainly a most extraordinary document. I am very ;rliipositio!i to the liill, I ask you from it, {Gentlemen, to jud^e the rest. No, 1 of this paper says that tlm KndoWmeut Committee i.s incorju)- ratod. I answer, it is uot incorporated. This paper comments on the statement that " other rcli^tnns denomi- nfttiona have obtained such Acts as they recinifcdi'' 1 did not say that those Acts are exactly similar in all respects, either to one another, or to the IJill now before you. You, however, pass Acts for other relif^ioH!* bodies, pivinj; them power to frame bye«laws, etc., and to enforce them with the stronjr arm of the law. Such Acts, then, arc the same in prin- ciple as this, and those powers you invariably p*ant, lliis IJill contains a clause stating tliat the Synod shall not inttTfere with any person not belonging to the Church of England, and also a clause that it shall not t interfere with any parish not represented. A lawyer belonjiing to the Wesleyan Methodists at once acknowledged to me that powers of the same kind were enjoyed by that body, as are sought for by this Bill. The Methodist Conference consists of ministers alone, and its constitu- tion is ba-sed on a Deed in Chancery, enrolled by John Wesley. I tnwt .3i«o 37 ;. riM,r,-lnnun will h. f„.n..l to umk. nl.i....,in„s. .houM .Ih-v appb tliat IK) CImii'.-Iii I't lmv»< tin- laify n>pr ,,.,,,,„,•, nnipt,.,- r, I of ,1,.. R,.vi-.»-i Si.uut.s i. most' simihir to tl.i- lJi||. Tl..» .-am-d -H.n..I w.ll „ot .av ,|.u, tl.is ('l..pt.,, .,0,. ,.0, ..nul.l. l^r.^ M US to tn.n.r ru . :. .0 1... ,.„fon-...I I,v tl... .tronjr „nn of ,1,. 1,,^ flu, uiuit": ■r';r" '^'r^/'-^:^;-" "->'< i-i-. a„.i a, s„,i^. „,....,!„;:; .'MT.mon su<-h p...n.l..„.ons not Immm,,^ rontrary to tl,;. Liw. of tf.is I'n" Y'l'-;-' "'»• '" .'"'y .mK. or n.LM.lalion ..u!,o.li..,l in tlu- I)o,..l, nn.l.T whirl, •o.,.v,.HH.,, o, son.,y n.ay I. ,.o„s,i,ut...l, as th. nu^jority .hal » MU ,u.<...sary (or the pov..rnn,..nt of ,1,. ..o,.pn.,^uion, an.l su.h n-.,,,- turn tl,.. l.ill l...|o,v yo„, ,„ one nsp.Tf. The. rlaxse consi.h.rs every .•..n.rrp,nn„ as a s..para... Chun!.. Th. only point. tlnM-efor., for yo,'^ thcrr..^p..,sthis..|a.,s.> .s p,v.,s..iy sin.Har to th. TJill.- 1 ank, is it ■l.,i:.<.,.s .o.|y to cMtor... tlu.r .v.LM.lalions hy the. sln,.,;r ,„,n of the law than yon havo h..,v .iv.n'to cvory .vli.io.s-ho.ly i,. the Provin.., cx'^; -M - Ives W. an. cx,.n,p,...l tron. it, ti..,, |.,V.,usc the las, clan.se !, f tlu Chap 01' CNpr.Jy .....n.pis „s, i.:.' ,,rif,u\\y, heoauso wc do not .^Toe to ,l.c; prn.. .pie of ovc-.-y con.Mv;.a,i<,n h.-in-^t separate Churd. u...;r, ,1 po.Mhh., sell jrn.alor powers. I do tn.st that before vo, •l-';-' "1-u .h.s ,na,fe,- y'-.>t<' th.. K.lneational Board'of the IVeshyteri-in !nnvh, (Chap. OS of the AV... of 18.:i,) the Le.islatu.v seen, ^'iv" e.|il .sauet.on to the tenets of the I'resbyferiat. Chun.],, for the seven . : :^j?;;; ::;:: '::z r^:^^ c'!^ ->: «»- '-•-'^-•, tiu^ synod shau provided that un.te wul. any (>rl/„Hh,r body of Christians prov.ue,, mat ' - .0 ,m,tod iKjdy shall prof;.ss and adhe,v to the eons/it..tioLnr princi- ples i){ the Weslniinster standards, &e." ' You have aHually passed an Act to declare the tenets of the Pres- .ye...., hu.-e of NovaSeotia, Orlhodoxr This is rather ex;r,.;;.di- n.uv m these days when th..re ,s no connection between Church an.l SU e. T ,lo not ask the Legislatnn. to express any opinion as , the .inetr.neso the Church of Kn-daud.-T shoihl be sorry to do ,o -but I an. nKu-ely showin-x you what you have already done.^ ' ■ " I he learned Counsel nderred in very stron^r terms to a -ehtlemau present, who ,s as respe.-table as ,iny -..ntleman her»^ o^t'ttemau i retened to the Acts incorporafiug other religious bodies, simply to • «.» M H* • I * > » • 'i' i '''■ i%'i If .»'l ••>'' ^.' .^M s^ ^how tliat tlio pT!ncii)lo of roproM-ritation has been .previously admitted. 'J'liere is aiiDtlier Act to wliich 1 attach m ire iniportiiiice, and to which I sliiill now call your attention. It is the Act based fin the union between th*; Pri'sbyteriaii Ciiureli of Xova Seotia and tlie Free Cliureh (Chap. (J8 ol" the Acts of l.S(;2). Tliat uni(jii Avas strontrly opposed 1)V one vei-y leadinir member of one o!" tliese bodies. The Act deals in rather a iiiirii-lianded way with all the projierty of tliesc bodie.-. They were not unanimous in desirinj^ this union or this Act, and the Act expressly states that they were not, and yet the Act Avas jjassed. I am t(dd tliat many ^.rentlemen object to the passage of tiiis IJill becau-e we are not unanimous in desirin;^ it. Yet this Act was ])assed und.r ju.-t such circumstances, and the sixth (dausa declares tlsat the provisions of the Ac shall not extend to the Chiindi or the Church property of the Rev. John (iunn. of Broad Cove Intervale, in (he county of Inverness, and other of his preachinii; stations, or to the Churches or Ciiurcli property of luiv of thi>'conjrre>fationH fonnerlv in connection with the rre.S on one side aixl 7 on the ..ther.— An.l iu>tead uH I J.avmeti onlv voting 111 hivoiir ol the api.Iieafion for the Hill, 17 J I H< ver expect to have t\ avnien voteil for it. c'xpeet to have oiilv tl one, wo .Iele;/ates from eaeli parish.— I generall', iia\ e taken exfrafirdinary pains fi le opinions of the pe,,p]... wiih re-ard to the Svno.l." In I8f>t; I circulars to the it. In Ixr.S I CI ergy. reijne^tinnf them to issue not wrote to tliehi air; lUl. atives woulil he elected aMe and willinir t tatinir that I h .Ilecf sent ices with reiranl to that rein-e the 1) o attend in Oetoher next, w] ■nt- len ismess of the next meetinnj uouM he transacted. In iHflO I'caihd pecial afteiilion to this a])pIicatiou to the Legi>l n Easter, 18(12. hnt in the notice- for the eh-ct master meetiiiir of that vi iMire. I was not hero ion oi' dele;:-ates at the ir, thi< application was speciailv iiientioned. ates to tl Some parishes have always eiectecl del poor parishes jniy the expenses of their didc-ates,— dele;:at(^s, hnt tht v elect them t >vno(| "loine very acts of the Synod. I therefore hold tiiat thes certain measure was to he dis(ii>-.'d, and 1 many do not send >\v that tiny will lu-"honiid hv the e pari.-hes knowiiiir tliut a ia\iii;r |,;,,1 tnni3 and oppor- tm.ity to oppose h, an.l not havin.^^ ,]one so, and havin.^- elect,.,! their dele"-ates, fhi; d ecision of the Svnod must 1 the whole body of ihe j)eople." "iive me a man of fle'sli and hloo.l tf 10 re;.ranled as tin lecision of what I am doin-r, Imt tli aiiyfhinir that can 1 ■^uhst )e call.'d ii ese shadows tlv ahoiit. I h contend with, and I know ivi' not 1 lean! mco of the oj.position i- real ohjectioii to the IJill. Tl le ■\vlio I do not like X"ii, Doctor Hell, But fhe rcasnri why, I oiiniiot tell In answer to the stat-Moenl as lo the Le-islatiire of Canad, I'l'cognizoi ])a])er, 1 tl cla; of the Svii 1 lia\iii le case o f C o(|s tor meorporai !oi|, it i.> said 111 11 mada is not m point. W ale of reservcfl Church lands in that 1 dccided-that tln^ amount h lell tile jiroeeeds of the !'o\ nice was appoi'iioiieil, it wa-i ::iveii over to the Church Societv of each d no-mo- to the Church of Kiidaiid should 1 consequence that that liodv charire ot it." In all this thrr, locese ; it wa:- mid 1 iiecent that the respective Sy„.„l< i,, (an.Ada have 1 IS not e\eu an attemjit to meet the stale- Act ofthe Leirislal ure ^^ »eei 1 iiicorpora'ed hy poration of the Chnn-li Societv. 'I hased ii[ioii just such ah,-olute tali; re lold somethiiijr about the Acts of I iicor- wliole opposition lo the Hill is icie as this. Avhich h; ive iiothiiiL'' what- leirislali on ot Canada, but when I >1 u country as Canada — a 1; '1 (l, with an iutorval of two voai-s. Acts incorporating Synods, it is a stro!iisho[), Cleriry. and i.aity shoidd meet in Synod. There was the dilliculty, however, that the representatives of all the parishes in Canada could not conveniently meet to^relher in one place. Another ajiplication was accordini.'iy mai>latures have this pow«>r. Mr. Loiij;- states tli.it the supremacy of the Crown is the doctrine of the Ciiurch, and while it is sncli. lie believes that SVnods are illeiral until thev recei\c th(^ authority of the Crown, or the sanction of the LeLrisluture'. fJrant us this As this dilliculty, and we liope to induce the few who are still keepinii: aloof, to join us. 'I'he last observation in this paper is. with reference to the parishioners of St, (rPor^e's. Coinmentin;j: on the stateuieiit that '• the parishioners of St. Geor^'e's have stated that tliey have no desire to ])revent their brethren, tfcc," it sav* : '" They have n(. desire to interfere, so lonL' as it remained a volnntitni assintJ/h/, but protest aji'iiinst its Acts beinjr made bindiu;]^ upon all over whom this r>i!l will j:ive ther.i power, without havin;f the j)rivile;re of recei\ ing or rejoctinjr it. and upon future -generations and new parishes, who will lia\e no opiiun to exempt tllemselves from its oontrol." Well, the petitioners ha\e certainly done their best to oppose the i)assaj;« of the Hill. I ha\t' shown you that Synoils are part of the constitnti(ui of the Church of Kiiuland. The R< ■iinatio Li(/i(in is constantly reh-rreil to. as, thouirh not bindinu', .--howini: the opinions of those whom we mo>t r*. ii*t III /III r 'I. ,.,...). It I.':. I... 1 ..„1.. 1. - ::u;iit,- iju'.i uan uxrv 41 ^^•»• 'should luive hnd Synods .-wry voar. The riirliamrnl in En-laiid, III conscqiicii,-,. of th.. Clnirfh of Kii-liuid tliore l.oinj? an ostaldis-li.-d ( iiircli. has always Ic-i.-lafcl U,r tlie Cliurcli, and consoqiu-ntlv Synods Ml into disi!-i', hccaiiso tlie laws and rc;.Milations wore made Ijv I'arlia- lutint, which otIicTwisc w<.nld he niadi! l)v the Synods. It has hccn hinti'd. rath.T than said, hv tho learned Counsel, that this Synod movement is .he a(rt of a //r/,V.y in IIk' Chureh. Nf.w tin- Hi.sho[> of Melhonrne went honuv tor the express purpose of ^rettinir an Aet passed to estahlish a Synod in his cople to make re.iculations for liiem.'^elves. than to leave it to the arbi- liary power of any one man. 'J'here are many cases in which tho Hisliop has the power to make rejrulations which mi;i,'Ii< not be proper, — but you are now asked to oivo this assemldv the po'wer to leuishite for themselves. The peopde who are to be under the rules are the jieophj whp are to make them. Synoro is o|,posed_to tlie mov.inent. I ask if m\' method— to let b..{h sides be heard— is^not fairer than that pursued there? The late Chief Justii(e anil Mr. Cogswell were opjiosed to the establishment of the SvikxI. I rt-^ked thoin to ;;o where they mi.tdit liear the other side. The establish- ment of the Synod was then carried by a large maiorilv, the opponents oi the movement being in a minority of 1 to -i. or'l to'o, and it is difFi. ■ cult to get peoi)le to alleiid thes.- Kaster meetings. Even in Halifax, I understand that it is .litli.-nlt to do so, except on some vcrv exciting o<>t»sioii, such as ihe discussion of (he ve such men as your Chairman, Mr. Fairbanks, and the t\vo Messrs, iiuitsiiouies, wiieiiier iliey are persons wlio ure so completely mesmer^ ^ \ 'if ' 1 '•»,.'T /4 I in 42 in mnl (hat thoy do not speak tlioir minds, and not only so. hut do n^-t toll tho Jiisliop the truth : I ,.;ni only say that the IJishop is to be pitied if he can- not jrot „„.n to speak the truth in his own Connuil. If he cannot get people there to tell the truth, what will he get out fif it? Men in authority will have advisers. If the Ilishop has not rccoqnizrd advisers, he will have 71h- rerorjmzcd ones,— therefore the. Clergy wish to iiave an assembly where the U:shop can receive advice from those who, from their position, are competent to give It. The learned Couns(d says: ".Some Bishops think themselvefi bound to enforce things with a high lumd." I admit that they do sometimes. My brother at Cape Town carries things with rather a higher hand than I should.^ The harned Counsel tells us what tl,e Bishop of Newfoundland did. Could he have done that if ho Iiad had a Svnod V To a man the Ch^rgy and Laity woidd have exercised the veto. But there was no .Synod, and JKince the difficulty. If the two Houses of Parliament wiU pass laws for us, as the Imperial 1 arliainent does for the Church in Kiif^laud. I am ipiite ready to take the posihon of the Church in Kngland ; but if you will do nothing fur us, give U8 tiie power to do something for ourselves. The learned Counsel says: "(Jive me a C^mstitutMin that a man worthy ot the name of a man can sit under, and I am with you." • I point out to Inm, and I ask you to cel has sai.l : " The Bishop will, some day. bo able to expel every evangelical Clergyman from the diocese, because ^they are the minority, and they are the mo.st pious." _ Mr. lUtrhie. — T .-,id that they juofesscd to bo guided more by personal l)iety than outwa.rd foniis. Thv Bishop.— \ am very mu. h inclined to call that shcrr nnnsoise, — such nonsense that I cannot treat it as an argument at all,— but I will .say this : that the power so much dreaded— the rc/o— must be exercised in favor of the mim.rlty. That appears to have beijn lost sight of. People fJncy that the ?vyo gives the Bishop power to do something. Mr. Kitchie has said: The Bishop can, without a seconder, introduce a resolution and pass it by his own trfo. 1 :„n sure that the learned Coun.sel never me.int to ask you to believe that. He must have meant something cl.-e which he did not express. I must repeat that the veto used in its mok arbitrary form cannot • enablethe Bishop In do anything. It is simply a r/trd: a draj, and can only hinder rash action, [fa measure is na.s.se(l bv the Clerov .,nd Lnltv nowever Uustastetul it may be to the Bishop, all he can say is— Stop a little {f 43 . consider this matter a little more. My own fcolin^.-n.y own I.loa of tbo n:nr 7:"" "'"""" " ^''"^^ '^='>-« ''^ -" '> ^''^'t I -"- -^ ^-l- -^V be we may mt it offence, but we cannot put it off Lniir fel.ea.c)n;,^ofur.to, see wl>at the Colonial Secretary has ,lone not very long ..go. In l-ebnmry, 1800, the Legislature of New l^unswick passed knn Jn •'" X '^'^'•'^M'? '^''- "'-''•« !^ - gentleman sitting in London. know ng notnng ot the Culon.es, and very much Influenecl by"vl,at he ma>- cai 1.3 pubhc and private comn.unications, coolly saying, afte^ half a session ailow^'t" ''""' '" ^'•''^"^'"g a "measure : I must advise Her Majesty to dis- vv' '^'"(''^"■^■— Tl|at\as not an Act affecting their local affiirs. Ufw, jMi>hop.—lh(i objection here is that it is referred to the United iVingufim. That unhappy man-BislMip Colonso-cannot be dealt with in Kn.rhmd .awjeis g;ve It as tho:r opinion that he -an be dcj.rived by the Svncd of tape J own and the Jiishop of Cape Town has taken pVoIccdino/ against uim 111 lis diocese. ^ fa nc.Won/^''T'''i ^n f -'T*'^^ ^" *'" ^'""''"'S of the .-urplice on particular occasions. I should be happy to receive a letter from him on the subject. any gentleman on the other side of the rpiestion. The letter to which he alluded was inserted in the C/n^rc/^ Record, just for the purr.ose of clicitin.^ b Jio^HL -f \r^ ^'''^' '? ^''''' ■■'">' ^'l^''gJ'"--'" to use 'the surplice. T beJ.eve that ,t would be much more simple and convenient, when the com- munion is celebrated, to allow the Clorgylmm to wear the sui ilice throu.houf through the service ha Clergymen are perfectly welcon.e to ..han-^e their ( rc.^ twenty times if they choose, except that in .ome parts of the scnice as tlje learned Counsel himself admits, they must wear it As to the Communion, the Privy Council has decided that a ^"cnd table must be used It was niy duty to call attention to this. ^. the I'.ivv (^n.nciI the higliest Court of Appeal, lut Have never attlplal to u.force I rs said the Bishop has lent him.elf to a faction. I haVe nothing further to say to tins than that the facts are as I have represented them , I give the learned Counsel credit for a great deal of bravery, when he nitroduced a matter^ which I had rather have passed over in oblivion Ho occupie.l .H.me time in descanting on certain transactions in St. Paul's parish Certain lea.lmg gentlemen of St. Paul's accepted at once the resolution which granted them al that they wished, and I ani%ery reluctant to pas.s by bis observations without some remark. I may, howeir, make some' statemel fli w<]i "I I 'i ',1 \ 4 ■ t ♦ 1 i '•> '«l t^\ s ■ ' ^liiC C,in'i( II iiowiiig wiiat weigiit ouirjit to bo .. , , ■ 1 . , " -■■•>. Ill ^-iuMMng wmu weii-iit ouiilit to b»-' atuiched to the .,p,n.on of the learned ConiK-el in any matteP in wl'^ch he is 44 iinu'li int(M-cstCil. Then' i> no niuii in tiiLs city, {n wlioso opinion on a point ofl:iw, where ho hus no personal fcelinn;, I would ratlior fl'fer, than to Mr. Hitchio's ; hut I cannot say the same when ho take.^ up any matter wliieh touches his fc'ilInL,'s. It is a good thin;,' to be zealous in a aood eauso, but I- must say that, oecaiiioiially his jiidi,mient is a little influenced l>y his feolinijs. Ho noticed tir^t/he application made by St. Paul's parish t Thurch coming tuge'her and asking you to pass an Act to which St. Paul's parish obj<'cfed." ^fl•. Rifr/n'c. — I was referr'ng to your JiOrd'^hip's action in the niatter. 71ipBishop.~\Wt I take it just the other way. Wo will take it in that waj7. The leariie.l Cjiuisel called your attention to the fact that St! I'aul's parish hau su(l(h!n!y iutn.duced :« Bill to alter the syntem of holding Church meetings t;irou';;hout this whole Pif)vinee, which "was int<'rfcring with the systen, throughout the whole world,— and to the fai't that I handed in a paper containing what I had to say on the subject. I ask nioitd»ers to con- sider this whole matter. I may mention that the same gentleman wlio intro- duced tliis liill was the Law Clerk, but here he wa^ able to u^e every influence in his power. I wish to tell you what ground I had for a'-king the Ltgislaiuro n It to ])ass that IJill hurrietlly. I applied to gentlemen whose authiuity may !)o considered as high as any. — the Hon. >h-. Jolmston and S. P. i'';urbanks, Esrp, Q.C. They independently gavo their opinion, and it is t!ii.s. (His Lord-hip th' n read Messrs. Johnston and Pairlmnks' opinion, — that the Hector was by law ex offirio Chair.nan of all parish meetings.) I ask you with such opinions as the.-rcrs their wi.shes, for T believe there is not a single parish except St. Paul's that does not wish to have the Chair at these" moetin'-s uceupied^ by their Clergymen. At the present moment St. Paul's is the only parish where the Rector is not allowed to , ke' the Chair. I do think that when the Rei'tor has not the eoafidenco of the peo[)le, so far as to keep him as the Chairman of thoir meetings, it is high time that he ;-iiould go bomowhere else. ''" T must now cotne to a more ])ainful matter. — the letter jmt in by tlu^ learned Coun-^el. T must toll you tlie origin of this h'tter. Tiiat h'tter was written on behalf of two men whom T considered to be hanlly dealt with. If may, perhaps, savour a little too much of the ch.aracter of" an advocate. 1 say at once that what [ felt I put in the strongest sense T could con-^i.^tentlv with truih. The two Curates of that parish attended the first Sysiod tha""t was held. The learned Counsel knows that they were reouired to say whether they meant to attend in future, and whether they intended to enforce the decisions of the Synod. These two gentlemen an^^wered rather hurri.Mllv, aftd upon the receipt of their letter came this resolution of the pari>h of St,' •1. 45 !n „'l,?'l^ ^f-^^'-.'^ .t^^ l-^ttors o'' the Rev. Mr. Bullock and (!,e Rev. Mr. Ma'urlf, mcc ,ng of ^ova hrotm and that they will fed themselves avfhon/cni tJ c.rr^ out the canons r^d rcffu'-.tions of that hcW t»;ft,?« .u- ■ il "''yj "> carrj n.cossarj for the parishioners ho^xver painful to their feelinir^, to decide that U.e connect H)n .h.ch ha, hitherto existed between the Kev.^ r lU. l"ck the t^ ^^^in^S;;^;;;-^!:^ '-''''' '^^" ""« ^^ ^^^ -p>-^- ^^ ^'- f-^ A resoltitiun w.-ts inovod in amendment, bu was lost. It was ..nnpo'cd Hat the Curate, w.uld be_ d,.,ni..sed for actin. in this matter aeeordinTto ^iKit they eonsulored wa. In accordance with ttcir consciences. I felt if o h>yuy duty when they had acted according to their consciences, to do wh t I he^t could for hetn T haaod. V^hatever may be the force of my interpretation, of the oath of canonical obedience, tt is very much in favour of the Syncd, and not agains t. If I were inclined to force my interpretation, when I place myself as a member of the hynod, I could not carry out my views. The learned Coun- sel however, ha.s insinuated that I Save altered my opinion, and he has cted what he ..ays I said. What I did r.y was this : '• f he Home Govern- ment have recommended the Provincial Legislature to pass an Act of this kmd lur Canada and doubtless we may obtain t!ie same, whenever the theTaf'TTlI *' -^ •'*"?' « ."«««'"«^««* «/'/''tW,o«/or it, accompanied by tbe draf, of a Bill previously discussed and agreed upon amongst ourselves '' ^Ve have now this unanimous wish to dll intents and purposes That is one reason for my assenting at once to this exenipting clau.se In this Bill I mat say that those who are affected by the Bill, as fi- «.= «n .„„.*, „^. ^--, I. „i of their opinions, are unanimous in applying for it. I wiff now merely 'I .1 •fu* • ' .1 '* ' I i. * 'M 46 rominil you tliut T have ro;iJ numerous extract?, anil cited opinions in favou, of till! IJill, a:iil I am sorry that tlio opposition, so far, has heen rather based on what \n aho;)vtiier irrelevant to it. I woukl also remind you that a great deal of wliat has heen said does not ap[»ly, simply on this principle — that this Bill only artects those who are under it. I stand here, occupying a responsi- ble position in the Church, and from the very nature of that position, 1 am bound to .set before you an exposition of the whole case, and to state nothin"' but what can be borne out by the facts when they are •xamined info. The Counsel on the other side has all the license of an advocate who has to make the best of his case. I. have endeavoured to show you, first, that Synods are part of the Con- stitution of the primitive Church ; secondly, that they work well in the United States ; thirdly, that wo require Legislative sanction merely l)ecau8e we are now under restrictions which require to be removed, in order to place us on the sail footing as other denominations, and to give permanency to the Synod, instead of its being dependent on the caprice of any Bishop who tnay be at the head of the diocese; fourthly, that without Synods we would be unlike the rest of the Colonies ; fifthly, that we are now without laws, except the old canon laws, and require power to provide for ourselves ; lastly, that the old canon law may be enforced, and the Bishop may proceed without any form . (His Lordship here read extracts from an Encyclopedia in support of his positions.) I pray you to consider that the opposition to this Bill is not now justifi- ttble, — it is not so on the merits of the case. The petitioners have already gained all that they demanded, and now when they have got all that they •want, ought they to come to us and say, "you shall not have what you want ?" I think it would have shown more respect for the Legislature, if havin" obtained all that they asked for, they had said, we will let our petition drop, and not ask for anything more. An attenipt was made by influential persons to get up a petition against this Bill, in the parish of St. Luke's, and it had to be abandoned because the effjrt was found to be hopeless. I could get up a minority petition in St. Paul's, for there are many gentlemen who would have been glad tc express their opinions in favour of this Bill, but who considered that the proper peti- tion should come from the legislative body of the Church. I Vas asked by several Parishes if they should send up petitions ; and I told them no, that it was unnecessary, since the whole body was the proper body to petition. My own experience of the petition from Wilmot is this. A protest was instituted in Wilmot, and I found on enquiry that a large proportion of those persons who had signed it, had, properly speaking, no right to call themselves Church- meu. A petition was sent to her Majesty by the same people asking in effect that I should be Bishop no longer. My reply to the Lieut.-Governor, on being; asked for an answer-, was that the persooa T?ho sierned the natitifin w^rfi ^■; P- i ttintivc. Most Uiankful will I be to Him wlio M-nt me, if the result of tlid arguments which I have hecn able, t^o very iin|)ortei:tlv, to address to you this day, sliould be to obtain for the ("hurch of tliis Province, a measure, which I am quite sure, if my judgment is worth anything at all, is essential to the welfare of the Chureh, and will greatly advance her prosperity, and the best interests of all hf!r memb«!rs in this country. If you say — we will wait until it is proved that you do well reprexMit the foclings .of the great body of the Clergy and Laity of this country, I ask you to consider this, that if you wait until you have found out that T am right, it will then be too late to ameml the eiTor. Reject this iiill, and you. leave the rejection of their just re(|ucst and application to rankle in the minds of the Olmrchmcn of this Province, and whetlicr it be right or wrong that any ^^uch feeling should be harlM>ured, still, human nature being what it is (and Churchmen are no more perfect than other men), this rejection will rankle in the minds of the Laity nnd Clergy throughout the Province, and they will want to know, why, after •ill that was put before you, they have not received at the hands of the Legislature of this Pi-ovince, the same consideration that has been extcndeti to all other parties. It h a most painful thing for me to stand in my position hero, yet I felt from the peculiar circumstances I could not secure a person that could put the matter properly before you, for it is a mutter foreign to the reading and studies of any legal gentleman. The work on the other side is comparatively easy, but it requires a greater knowledge of the subject to refute the opposition and show the real position of the quc»tion. I do sincerely believe that you could not at thie moment inflict a more last- uif injury upon the Church, than, after all that has passed, to reject the ap- plication which they have addressed to you, simply to be allowed to do what they will with their own. Let it not go abroad that Nova Scotians cannot get here what Churchmen can get in every other country. We ask for justice and impartiality. We ask you, gentlemen of this Committee, not to be led Qway by any irrelevant statements, not to be led away by my learned friend, but to weigh the solemn arguments, U) separate the facts from his own views, and let them not have any undue effect. I entreat you, gentlemen, upon who.se repjrt the fate of the Bill may de- pend, not to be alarmed by the loss of money with which we are threatened. I believe that if you report against this Bill, you will have the whole Church in a state of agitation. Let us know the worst. Let us settle down as .soon as we ran. If God be pleased to give gowl fisheries and han'ests to the fish- ermen and farmers, they will be able to make up far more than all that may be taken away from them by those who propose to withdraw their money. As I told you the other day, referring to this matter, this is no mere matter of suspicion. It is known far and wide that this threat has been deliberately held out, that it has been made in the most formal way, that the sources from which we have hitherto derived our support for our Clergy will be closed up, it we presume to come rorward to presti our applicattun for what we believe 'i 49 Jo I'o our riglit,.. Wc know that in tl,..' o.ul wr >l,:tll be succossful but we do .jok to you t. ..00 that we .lo „„t s.HIt uu.Ut this infliction. Wh^rtL pco- £ 'i: t'/hl'""^ '7 ^ '•'"'" ^"i"'^*-"' '' ^'^•-"" ^" •^^'='' -'^^ their c^Xr' H la ,h,,.arcc;allo.l«,ou to .U.fu.n.l nunc upon their own efforts, there w bo a oohn|r of earnestness awakono.l that will 'have a very good influenc^ w u^ ; ' ' T'*'' '" ^' *"■ '""•■^ *'"'" •'-^ f"^^-^ «ver done yet. By t ',;;.. Til"' 1^ "'"'->; "'=>>' be withhehl, the feeling of earnestness in the Lhnreh w.ll urge the people to .lo more than over, and perhaps it may bo a bloss.ng to the Church in this Province. As is w 11 known vlehew' founded or not, there is a jealousy of city influence througho U t e ounhy 1 have no rea.son to suppose that the five nu n,bors of the one bankirZ who held «oats m this Hun.se allowed the.n.solves to be influenced by th feeln.gs as banker.., but the country wa,. not sati,.(ied. Just the same th n.^ nTrrilen^'" ^'"P^? '" '" "'""^^>' ^''"''^ ^'"''^ ^'-- •« - family compa"' a^ d an .nfluence a.nongst a certani nun.lK^r of i^ersons that prevails with the Bishop, and prevents h.m doing what he would otherwi.se do. On 7hL day 2 S^ xcJ-T?"'"^- f'^^f "'>"^'*' '' ^''« '^'^^^-' I '«"«^ ^7 pledge to do all that wh>ch I consider to be for the benefit of the whole Churt;h WoJnn' ■! T-"' *^^ ""^""^ 'P'""''''^' ^'^'•« "«* ^^^'"^ ^'^^ a view to pub- lication,-.t being supposed that, as his Lordship had employed his own 3't'l' ^f T'* ^y '^'' °^"*'''''"^" «f '^'^ Lordship's speeches wouldT publLshed ; the above report is therefore somewhat fragmentary and imperfect a"gumcnO '' '' ''"'"" '" '^' '"aterial parts of his Lordshp's .'. <". IV- If' * ' ',; 50 Mi^ KITCIJIE'S SKOONl) SPEECH. Mr. Ritchie. — It will \w iiocossary to occupy * much longiT time In mr reply to his Lordship than I had iiitundod. lliw Lordship laid down, when ho last addrciised you, sonic vi-ry extraordinary legal propositions, bnt to-dav be has relieved mo from all diiFiculiy on that score, because Ik; has introduced, M law, certain principles whicli are utterly inconsistent with what he enun- oiated aa law on Monday. He told us then that We who are connected with the Church of England were, at this moment, without law of any kind, — that we were liable to be despotically governed by the Bishop, that whatever the Bishop chose to do he could do, — that he desired the Synod in order to limit the exorbitant" power that he now possessed, that while in England there was a series of statutes which restrained the power of the Bishop, — that aince the reign of Henry VIIL not one oC those statutes was binding here. To-day his Lordship has given us more sound views on the subject. He has either read up since Monday or has obtained more correct information from gome friend. He now says that when Englishmen go forth to form a new Colony, they take with them all the law of England suitable to their position, — that a Churchman coming to this Province is bwund by the laws regulating the Church in England. His Lordship is ahogothcr better advised to-day, for he read the statute of Elizabeth, and admits that this and other statute.-* passed after the reign of Henry YHL, and prior to our having a legislature are in force. His Lordship commented on his anomalous po.sltion in having to oppose a lawyer. I would submit to the Committee whether I am not under a dis- advantage in this respect ; for, if I had a profesaional man oppised to me. there would have been certain principles of law. which he would have con- ceded, and would not have one day propounded principles of law to support one branch of his argument, and on another day oi)positc principles to sup- port another branch. No man could have conducted this argument so well as the Bishop has done. Ho addressed you at one time as au advocate repreaenting the Synod, at another time representing himself ;— at one time representing the Bishop here, at another time the Church over the whole world. He dwelt very much upon himself, and said he would not do any- *}.:«<* nrfiiVK \\o thouf^ht iniurions to the IntcreHts of the Church. You must remember, however, that you are not legislating solely for the present Bishop. 1 51 ' (TureCC 1 fl. a"^?^ ^^ ^^"'^•'° ^«^ «P'«««P«1 jurisdiction oL the Chnl^h of P T ^ '^:f^""^ '^'™' ""^^^^ ^^^^ ^"^y bishop is the head of he t hurch of England, and has supreme jurisdiction. From tlTn J n ^^ '°A*^' ^""^•^ ^''^^^ '^•^ ^^'« P«int i« similar to ours apnears from the following American authority : " It was itnnorted bv onr nS^^^ ihat Ihe statueos I haw just referred to wcr. nTi- f„!! u l " """"« iag bis Church uuder his feet T hate bXht h2 T .l"""' ""' T "'"''- Bbhop and of the Committee, if ,he7 deti i f.^^^^, S^' ,°' '5' hnghind, are in full force here. (Mr. Ritchie here rof^rrSi^v ^T ,, "' tion of statutes which he laid befo^\ the CoinmittT) "^ ^''"' ^"^ (iood will result from this discussion. It will make f!hii«>}> ~.«„i ,i • r. and if after they know the position they will X^ tl^Svt S' 1 ' Synod a. . eontemplatad. they come ire aJd asklriTBrnXntm' .':•( ( t i ■ :•- j: ' n ■'1' *^-- \ lUO iuiv with regard to imperial rtatutea is thi«: AU statutes pa«ed •'I ' » 52 before wc had !i legislature of our own, and appliculile to our condition, arc binding liero, beeoming in fact our coiniiion law ; but statutoH parsed aftci' that period are not binding here, unless the Colony isexprestily named in ttie Aet. ' To sliow that this principle has been recognized by the imperial parlia- ment, and that tlu^y (exercised jurisdiction over the Churcli of England here, even after we had a parliament of our own, I may refer to an Act passed iti the r)tHh year of the reign of George III., onntldl. " An Act teople in Nova Scotia would object to it. * (Mr. Ritchie then commented on the conduct of the Bishop in refusing to allow parishes hitherto represented in the Synod an opportunity of saying ■whether they were still willing to have a SynfMl, and to be bound by it, now that it was proposed to make it a legislative body. They had been asked to Bend delegates to a Synod possessing deliberative but not legislatire poweri^. ) I ask, do the Chnrch peojJe of this Province require such an Act as this? His Lordship has almost admitted to-day that they do not, — not in so manv words, it is true, but I will show you how he has in point of fact admitted it. He Bays that Cbareb people do not want this Act to leg^izc <\ 53 their Synods, any more than the Prosl.ytorians require an \ot to h.^Vvc^ tbe.rs lie says t ey can now have a voh^ntary Synod. "''"' fhJ^ ^f ''"l'/•''"^>:••:l tj'^t in all banking, in.ura.ice, and other societies they have law. l.y which the nie.nl.er,s are bound and hut th7 C .,m. il": ;^^zar.e of t|,ose laws^ The dif^rcnce betwe:;: Ihl'f .tttr^^'t arrbu w:;;/;rr: ■"■"""", '^"7 'y^^'^^-^ lk.d to ju,„ tins >y„o.l, witl,«ut knowin- what law. nnv bo tho other „<■„,,,,», I „,„ .,„,„ i„|,| .,,,,1 I , ^ (,|„ I ^1^ '"<'" •fame., |„»s„l,.,l at tte Co,,,,.!!. a,„l h-,i the frf„, ,,,^1 l,o ,, tern, 'el I, 'lit [„-*« 1 i- ■ • 1 ' """t 1. so and M). Ihere he j^aid was the iWo h^ ad ot .,v,,,o; the obvous n.eanin. .f opunon to the word tnm la cS ^1 tenee he ccn.idorod that it .iiowed the absolute power of a nr.wi i;, t «; I ov^r t^,e otd,er .ne.bers of the Synod. That waHL k! d ^ S 3s^ I^C e e held then; what sort of Synods were held afterwards V Con." dor the h..story o ^ynods and General Councils since, and then say whether ^ n ' not result fi-om .ueh bodies, if not properly constituted. ^ ^ ^ Ihe Episcopal Church in Kn;,.land was never in a sounder state than at .resent, nor was there ever a tin>e when there was n.ore piety tnot In dergy and (.ople, and yet there are no Synods there, nor i.s^h^ir iantVl fh re are. doubtless, unsound n.en and irreligious n,en to be found a„>o„t both Clergy and La.ty, but do not let us be told that the Clruch ot E,!^ and .s un.sound. becau.^e there is a IJishop Colen.so, while we reme.ntth there was a Judas Lscariot among the Apostles. The J}ishop tells you that the l>arliament in England makes laws for tlw U|ureh, because the Chun-h people of England would rather ha f^uf^o^ done or th,.,n by the Parliament than by a Synod. I b.li.ve that t lu vZr ties Churchmen wou 1 be better protc:eted by Parlian.ent tha y a S , ^ ■ ^.St^con^r:) tE'ar ''''"''' ^''''^ ''' '^-^^--' ^ '^ "'^ - _ The Bu-hop .ays that the Synod doe. not intend to Interfere with civil nghts. i:„lus, however, would be affi.ted by ,he Kill, which are de rer /o a man than any cjvil r.ghts. ]iy passing the Bill vou ,nav rvivc a (M rJvman he^ower to withhold t-on, an individual tho.e rel^i.ms o^dhilmis wS"^ ' W "1 V""'; ;■'' '"; ""'•' '"'"'^' •■•''"^■^ •••" I"-^^-^'- ^I^'^l^od-s of men have ^uffe.cd dea h rat!>er than give up their religious liberties. " .ml:'::':]:^.T\:fl^T:-:l!^' ^'^ .•..---•-tives of the peopleV very questio,. Iputto hilm ' I^^y^H"" "•"' '"' '^^'"' ' ''"" ''' '^' ' M * ' L i ' '•{ •f.,'i #1 I" %\ i^ A . A i .'.'I • I '1 V^l nn. Will you not tru.st them : 'M I confess T am not ploat^cd with tho course tho Clergy and Laity, wbo have met in 8yn(nl, have taken ; hut, untie their handn, an(i 1 tliink in time they will bo educated up to the right point liut tie their hands, says tho Bishop, the Laity may ap;ree, the (^leniy may agree in a matter, htit I will retain tht; powor of vetoinc; their proceedings. 1 must keep them in leading strings. 1 ask, then, who i,-! it that will not tru.st them V I do mistruHt them when they :ire placed in .svieh a [Kisition. I will kIiow yon presently how the queijtiou i.f veto ha.s been treated by the Bishop in an adjoining Colony. Tho Bishop tolls you that tho"'j;h there are no Synods in England , there arc Synods in the United States. Will he loain a Ie.s.son from those Synods? In all those Synoils the Bishop had at first the iW'/ power. But now through the length nnd breadth of tlio land, every a.ssembly. with one exception, has abolished tiie rcto. The Bishop, hcwever, jirnetu-ally tells the Clergy and Laity, meeting in Synod, that he does not intend that tlioy should over have the control of their own affairs. The Bishop tells us that this Synod is one of the most democratic conven- tions in the world, ;uid that it allows a new tdection of members every year. That is a capital arrangement to m:)intain tli(i existence of tin- Synod, for men who came there onee and ascertained that they jmssessed no power would not bo likely to conic there again. There is one point of the case which his Lordship touched gently, and I must say that there is no man in Nova Scotiii who could have tlone this with as much adroitness. I refer to the oath by which the Bishop is supposed to bind the Ch'rgy ; because, if it is admitted that that oath bears the constnic- tion wliich his Iiord>liip put upon it in the letter which I read, then he hai» under him. in that Synod, a elnss of men who are as far from being independ- ent as any human beings can be. I do not know what other Bishops might do, — for tliey do such strange things sometimes, — but I do not believe the present Bishop Would, if tho Clergy voted contrary to his wishes, meet thora with their o;ith and ,s:iy- -the guilt of ]>erjury is on you, In'cause you have not obeyed me. But if the Clergy Ix'lieve that they are bound to do what- ever the Bishop tells them, and that if they do not do so they are committing a grievous sin, then I s:iy it is impossible for them to act indejx'tidently. t told his Loi.l>h!p on Moiulny that I felt sure that that could iint be the mean- iu"' of the o;ith. I believe tluit there are hundreds of men ordained who would not be (U'dained if they believed that. I know that there is no such oath in the ordination service. Tlie Church does not impose it. — the law does not impose it. The Bishop says tliat every (Mergyman in this dioceso takes this unth. T/ie Jlis/iop. — Tl.oy do so in every (lioc(>se. Mr. Ritchie — His Lordship says that Clergymen in every diocese takes this oath ; then the construction he would put apon it must be erroneous, for in England Clergymen continually disobey their Bishop, when ho direct* i' 55 thiin to do what ho Ims no l.;i.'al juithoritv to rcriiiire, and thoy contest Iu8 authority when ihi-y believe hv vx<-oo is not v .ether the Cler-vnian lias been guilty of perjury. l)ut whefher the Bishop had the le-al r'iglit to interfere. His Lordship says there are rai.oii- of the Church, which he could jMit fn force f.. the anrioyan. e of the Ckigv. if he chose. He says that these canons bind the Clergy, but not lie' Lj.ilv. I um not quite sure lint tliey bind either in this I'roviuce. but if thcv do, I do not know that tlte ( lergymen would have much ri;.dif to coiiipliiin. for when they took, orders tliey knew that tliey would huve to obev them. His Lord ship t.-Ils you that these canons are not iu ine lunv,' that they have gone into desuetude, ;iud tliat he will not introduce them, because many of them an; obsolete, ami mjuiy itbsurd,— very -otxl reasons these for letting tlwem rest wlier(> they are ; but none of these says tlial various denominations have come before this House to ask for Acts of iiieo-poratiou, and iiav(! never been refused I ask iiim to show me the case ii. wiiich such an Act h.as been granfe.lj where there has been opjiosition from the denomination itself. Hig Lcjrdship went througii almost every denomination that has members in this House, and said to each one of tiie«e gentlemen— You are in the same Ix.at willi me. I ask tliese gentlemen, are they willing to be put 111 tlie same boat with us, and be governed by a Synod with^suidi a con- Ktitution as his Lordship't^ Synod iias conferred iipou itself: if not, do not pui US in it. • . • • I » r 4*1 • * ■ \ i 1 Chap. 51 of tlic Kcvisod Statute* *• Ot" Kfli^'ioii.- Cnnprrfpatioii.i and Societies," has been rcfenod to ' and tlio P»i>liojt say,-: ••Here is lui Act you gave the disst-ntcrs. and wf arc excluded tiom it, jrive us one like it." Surely his Lord-^liip docs ruA know the history of lliis Act. At th« time (1851) when these Statutes were compiled, we. of the Church of England, asked to be relieved from fJiis Act. because we wislicd to liiuf an Act of our ov.ii. The Weshyans also said : Ave want to l)e relieved, because we liave statutes of our own. 'llic lycgislature said : Very well, we will give you Acts for yourselves. Chapti-r 5(». Kevised Statutes "•• Ol the Church of England," was accordingly jnissed. IJiit wliat -was the nature of that Act ? Was it an Act like this, enabling the Church to establish courts to lorm a parliar.UMit paramount io the Legislature ot this Province ? The AVesleyans and I»a])tists ol)tained ActA f()r their cougregations Hiniilar to that which the Cinu-cli <»btained for tiieirs. Thfjie Acts refer to matters connected with their respecti\e congregations, but do not profess to regulate the d"iscipline or inembership of the Church. A Baptist would l)e astonished if he was told that monbcrship in his Church was regulated by Act (>f I'arliament. The constitutions of the various dissenting bodies — Bai)tisfs, Presliyterians, and Metliodists, are settled. They have their Avritten constitutions and confessions of faith, and would not be content to have the Legislature interfere Avith them. The live-IiaAvs to be made by the cougregations incorporated under this Act (Chap. 51, I?. S.) must not touch disci{)line or anything con- nected Avith the principles of the Church. ^ Just fancy l*resl)A'terian congregations incorporated under this Act establishing a form of Church government, inconsistent Avith Presbyterianism. Take the case of Bap- tist congregations. Could they make regulations allowing infant bap- tism ? Both of these bodies have Synods, but they are not hehl under this Act. There Avould ha \e been some analogy between this Bill and the Act (Chap. 51 R. S.), if the Synods. Coiilerences. and Associations, of these bodies Avere held under that Act. The fact is, a (jucstion of this kind has never been bel'oiv tlie Legi.-luture at all. This Act relates entirely to the management of the internal l»usiness affairs of the.-" bodies. The Bishop says that the Keclor ha-^ a right to take hi? seat as Chair- man at all parish meetinirs. How ihx'-i he get that law? He can oidv obtain it by overturning the structure he i-rected on IMondav. The Bishop says that he Avauts uniformity in all these matters, lie savs that St. Paul's Avanted to have a law for tlu' Avlmle Province, giving tiio parishioners a right to elect their own ( liairiiian. The parishioners of St. Paul's AA'ould have been glad lo have this law for theniseh es alone, but the Bishop said. im. Avhate\'er law V(tu h;*Ne. they must have over the Avhole Province. Tiiat is not the case in England : some parishes 1' 5 i choose one of the Churchwardens: some both, i.n.I vot thcv all oquallv bclong to the Church of Kn,Han,l. It will hunllv be conlen.le.l tha't where we have ourselves leiri.late.l on a subject, that M-e are not under our own aw a one Shortly after the J'rovince was colonized, the sub- .lect of the Church of ^n.^^land was taken into consi.leration by the Le,s;.slature. It was then provide.! that the parishioners should ".neet and transact their business. I conten.l. and I „r Act. Ph orv now and then one hears of a new power asserted by a Bishop, and a dav or two a-o I noticed siudi a power exercised by one of them. His Koval Highness the IVince' o Wales has been married b.dore thi.^ TheVe was some ditlicultv about his being married in L,>nt. among some members of the Church. Ihe Bishop of Oxford has been kind to a into a noose, and cannot get them out. The Bishop tells me that I must not say that independent men will not sit m his Synod, because there are indep.Mident men in the Synods m Canada. They may have been liinMl into them. If they had had the experience we now luue, they might never have entered I hem. The B'"!"'" C!a\-a f/v til.. .,.>..:. I 1\„ 1.1 Synod, and discuss the question tiicre ; but whcu he once gi'ts'them there. I • ^'\t /-I k iff 'I ^<4 "*"L • I • '. ■tu .> I- 58 fhore th( V must remain. He says ht; does not want to force parislies into tlu" Synod, but when I ask him to '/i\i\ the parislies now the privilege of sayinfr whether ihv.y will be bound by the Acts of the Synod, and are still williiifr to utt( iid it, — when I ask him to <;ive them the privilege of expressing their opinion, even shouhl it bi^ in six weeks' time, he says, no, those parishes that are rfpreseiiied in Synod now shall be bound. But, I ask you, gentlemen, should he not give them the option now ? He tells us in «(>>•'/»•, tliat iu; is content ; but in. arts he says he will not accept the bill with a clause giving that power, lie tells us that in the lirst assembly under the bill, there will be no veto power; but how can the Synod get on at all without him? It he chooses to remain away, where is the; Synod ? The liinhoii. — I did not think of that. Mr. Ritrhic. — In one ot tliese Synods in Cansida, they have two or three honorabh-s and a judge. Now see what tlie honorables and the judge waiU, and whiit they get, I read from an account in a Canadian paper of the proceedings at a Syuod in Toronto. " Thi' present coiislitution confers upon the Birliop the v(*to power, so called; and Mr. (). Farrid now j)ropo«ed a ri'sohitioa to the following cfl'ect : " That in article No. 14, tlie following clause bo added : — • But in tlio event of the Bishop refusing his as^sent to any measure adopted by the Clergy and Laity, sueh motion may be brought forward at the next meeting of the Syno advantajre of conduninir tiu- laws in force in both countries. The Hon. .Mr. Cameron opposed, and Jud'M' Arnistron .'^ynod. (Clieers.) ' ' ° Tiiat i<. liail I all the po\ver jiossessed by the Presidi'nt of this house,— "I should ( oiisider myself merely as 'the moderator of a Trosbyteriao a,S8e_mbl^. ((ireat cheerin;!.) Is it to be suppose I that I would set myself against the united action of the Cler'^v and Laitv." It is strun;re liow the man deceives liimself. Ho says — do yon sup- pose I could use the relo, and at tlu' v(>ry time lie wa.s using it in the most offectual way, and stopping' the discussion. _ "I consider myself as co-equal with the other brandies of the Synod." Then, if la; does, let him go out of their assembly, and not control their discussion. Ilis Lord-hip in his argument this morning is driven away from the Sovereign to the Secretary of State to find a precedent for this veto power. The Bislio]) has tohl ns of a Colonial Statute being disallowed by her Majesty. That Statute was dilallowed on the avowed principle that the Legislature had undertaken to pass an Act to affect people out of the Prcnince, and that tliercfore it was uneon^itutional and could not be allowed by her ^NFajesty. Is there a Colony in existence that could allow a man to sit in their Legislatures, join in tluMr deliberations, con- trol them by a veto power, and adjourn them whenever he pleased ?■ Such a constitution would not exist any longer than the time necessary to pass an Act to destroy It. The Li-iiop goes on to say, in the paper from Avhich I read — " Are we to give ourselves a Pn'sbyterian form of goxernmcut ? I shall never sit here as tlu' moderator of a Presbyterian Synod." And the reporter Bignificamly adds — "This appeared "to have settleo» the riyht to M'nd with the ii.ciinihcnt tlirei' lay dide;:ates. as its rcpresenta- ^ tives. The elections took jilace at Easter, and no nimsiial interest was taken 111 the liiafler, until it was dis(()vcred that the l>i-!inp's party were exertinjr theniscl'.es to the utmost to iiiHiu-ncu the return-. C'lcr.rviiien in favor of the Ik-iiop's cx(diisive pretension-i, openly canva-scl fir vofcs. a!;d resorted to other means to secure their enils. which" no cause would jir-tilV. Tiie Kcv. Arinine Mountain— hi^ name should he recorded— seems to have also distin- .iruisheH. or rather dcLO-aded himself, hv a low stratarein. ..vliich snniy must he eon.h.mned hy all ri^dil thinkiuL' men. Tiie Qiiehec (iazette, in detailinL' the history of the proct iHlinL^s. says: '])nrin,tj passici week, the incumhent of Si. MicliaclV ('liajiel. the Rev. .Vrniine .Mountain, iiaviii- lu'ard that the Laitv in iiis mis.l.m were piepariini to hriniz forward their anti-veto eamiidates for the Easter election, and that witli every prospect of returiiiii;r them as delejjates. verv injudiciously to sav the least ot it, determineil to thwart this attempt hv a scheme unworthy of a minister (if t!ie (;osi)el. The Act provides for the'eleetion heinj; held at the taster nieetinjr, or at nn-etinirs to he ."specially called by the Clerj^yman. The Laity in his mission consiilered that the election would therefore be on the Easter :\[onday. or that tliey would receive due notice when it would be. Now what does tills incumbent do/ On the (iood Fridav, having his veto trK'nds in the Chapel, he gave notice that the election would take place im- mediately after service. Few attenf Chapel oni*hat dav, and consequently his veto candidates haviiur everything j.repared, were dulv elected without opposition. Xow. was tins a notice contemplated hv the Act V Was Good Friday a day upon whicli it should be given ':' Certainly the Laitv thouirft not, and considered the whole a combination resorted to," to defraud them^of their fraiKdiise. As such it was regarded by the Laitv in thisCitv : and when It became known, »vhiened it by djctatori.dly, in his address, saying that he would conduct the c'ecticm hv receiving the vote in an open manner,— that he would admit iKuie to vot"e who were not liabitnal attendants ai the Cathedral,— and that he w(,uld carry out the instructions he had recei\ed t'rom the Bishop, based niion le..al advice Upon this. Mr. JctFrc v H:il,.. ;.. an. '.'xcci'ihtcrlv !•.!•!!:■!•!■.• ■.;■.■'-.-.!,...■'".....,>...!...! that the mode in which the voting should be' conducted ought to btTTett to "I" ff---v€^ ■ .*I^~ «»-<-s.i-, 61 the mcetlnjy an,i that the olo.-tinn sl.oul.l W im.lo hr hnllnt. iJpon tlii. two srentlemen ot tb. v.-ry f.r.t Htandinj; in our sori.tv. I..ust out apai.wt m^n a violent orr...,t ,.t n-jnuacl.. whi.h was ai.ly .,.;.,MHl...i hv tlJTuluJ! orswh.,lKul.o»,,rn.gat..l near and rnuml tlu> tal.I. at which tlie CI aiE the Rev. Mr I ..,.., nan, sat. '1 he Chairman sahl h. vvouhl .v... o no mot o' -he wouhi l,sh.„ ,o no d.s,.uss,on,-he ,vns instrt.rted l.v th. Ui^hr^ « m / down any who r.tt.mpted to .poak. and mu.h to tho same of er 'C unusual mod. and hi;rh-handed atten,[,t to ..ontroi th. minds a-ul w 1 ofthos^ present, was r.s.s.ed, and a .-l,ort war of word, was the .•ouse.|nrm' I at the noise and cont.usu.n whud, th.n aroso provc-ntod anv ar<,,„n.nt he n^ ™. ami no ro-sult attend., this eJfort to .-urb th. .xorhitaia pr^tensiors of the Chan-nKU.. J he meetmg felt tin- «M..ons,it,.tioMal pow.r ,llus .ms, ed by the Chairman, an.I lH.<.a„H. very mu-h vxasp.-rat.d al It-the more so ^vhe he rhairman refused good voles, because the eunstituents had not been o Cnnreh for six weeks or so. ..<.-' J^'^-uT''- "*'^»f'"?J^io»n'l^'^ a^ above-mentlone.l, on the simple doela- ration of 'being a member of said Chureh, and fcelongin.r u, no other " Tlmt was the only test re-pured by law ; yet the Chairma.rand manv other, ealkd on th^ Sexton to be the arbiter of a man's rights-the Sexton, 'who^'usbes U IS to see to the preparation of grave, and to assist in depositing the eornse- wa., called upon as the veto friend, to .lestroy the right of franchise, and ?hen enshroud ,t in the tomb. A voter was openly e^illed a liar bv th same' Chairman, and the Laity only responded to these insults by words iu"tifiab v warm Sueh was the manner in which the Cathedral election was carried on, and notwithstanding all this two anti-veto delegates were- elected 'Ihe results of the elections, so far, show a large majority atrain^t th.> veto. This IS very gratifying when the amount of o^pposition L eoSerld TUere is now every prospect, we rejoice to say, that this objectionable feature of the proposed constitution of the Synod of the diocese will be struck out '" His Lordship is quite mistaken on one point. He says that thp people holding evangelical views are in favour of this Synod movement There may be some fo^Y of them in favour of it, but the movement originated with the other party. I view the question irrespective of partv and would have neither section of the Churcli domineer over the other In the diocese of Huron the outcry against the veto is made bv the Hi-rh Uufrch people, for in that diocese they arc in a minority. 'There' the Low Church people are disposed to coerce the High Churchmen as iti other dioceses the High Church people coerce tlie Low Churchmen There is one point in my former argument on which I was anxious to hear his Lordship, but on which he did not answer me. I stated that when the constitution of the Synod was framed, if the Synod contained a majority of High Churchmeti, they could turn out every Churchman in the diocese, holding evangelical views. The only answer given to thio IS a very short one. It is just this : " Sheer nonsense." I ask ig h " sheer nonsense" if this Synod pass High Church rules and regulations i-^if.:;rc 1" ii:c iiiuuc ui uuuauciing ine puoue wursiiip ? wiil, or Will not the evangelical Clergy be bound to obey and conform to them ? Now 1 ^ri i HI atw iL 62 jto Into a Pusoylti' or Tractariivn Church, niul you need not heat* a word said, but you know, not only how the stTviccs will he coiKlucted, but what doctrines will he preached ; you would know it by the mere form of the Church and its fnniitiire. There would be on the (Oinnnniion Table, or, as they always call it, tho Altnr, witli its altar cloth for different seasons, candles burning,', not to mention the flowers, and this thing here, and that thinjr there. I ask, if all those regulaticns ml^ht not be made by the Church Synod of Nova Scotia, and all Clergymen made to obey them. Why does his l/ordship .«ay that tho members of the >Synod, and those who are represented there, will still belong to tlie ( Iiurch of Kngf- land, if the Bill is passed? It cannot be so. Wluat is the meaning of belon'jin"' to a Church ? Docs it not mean beini,' bound bv the same rules and regulations? Ihereiore, if the Church of England has one set of rules, and the Church oi Nova Scotia another, will tliev not be two CMiurches? That was just the difference between what was formerly called the Free Church, ami the Presbyterian Church of Nova Scotia. They did not vary in doctrine a hair's breadth, and yet they were distinct (Churches. We of St. Paul's and St. George's will belong to tiie Church «)f England, and his Lordship will be the first Bishop of the Church of Nova Scotia. When this Bill is passed, what more connection will there be between the Church in this country and the Church of England, than there is between the Church in the United States and the Church of England ? One is the Episcopal Church of the United States, the other will be the Episcopal Church of Nova Scotia. The supremacy of the Queen is gone in the nat>ire of things. The Bishop. — I understood you to say, " Some day the Bishop will have the power by veto to turn out Evangelical Churchmen." 3fr, Ritchie, — No, no, I did not say that. My argument was, that the majority in the Synod would have the power of passinu Synodical regulations to exclude a minority, or any class in the Chureli that might not agree with them. •I have referred to the power claimed by the Bishop over his Clergy,, under their oath of obedience. Now see how English Clergymen differ from Nova Scotia Clergymen in their construction of this oath. The Bishop of Oxford lately gave an order that there should be a pause during divine service, in order that prayer might be silently offered with reference to the unhappy divisions existing in the United States. One of the Clergymen in his diocese did not approve of this. He thought that if this order were carried out, the prayers Avould cease to be common prayer ; that one man would be praying for the success of the South, another for that of the North. The opinion of Counsel was taken on the question, whether the Clergyman was bound to give the aoUce. The Clergyman has no scruples on account of his oath. Ue -I' 63 wants to know first whctln>rlio in bound by law to do this, bocatino If the law rcquirt's him to do it, trtrn tht- oath })iiid.s him, but not otherwise. The frentlemcn wlio jrivc this opinion, say, " W'c assume that the Bishop of Oxford issued the injunction in question under the rubric which immediately follows the Niccne Creed. That rubriir is as follows: 'Then the curate shall declure unto the people what holy days or fastin" days are in the week foUowinj; to be observed. Anil then also (i? oeeasiou be) shall notice be -riven of the communion; and the baims of matrimony published ; and briefs, citations and excommunications read. And nothing shall be proclaimed or published in the church during the time of Divine Service but by the minister; nor by him anything but what is prescribed in the rules of this book, or enjoined by the kin<» or by the ordinary of the place.' This rubric d(KS not qualify the express lanpruage of the 2ud and I7th sections of the Statute of Uniformity, nor of the 14th Canon; it does not enable the ordinary to alter, add to, or diminish the ' order' or ' form ' of ptiblic prayer." They go on further to state in substance that the Bishop is boimd bv the rules of the Church, that he has no power to order notice to be given o{ any matters except of certain things specl.ied in the rubric, and others of a like kind. They say " the power attributed to ths ordmary, of enjoining the minister to 'proclaim' or ' publish,' must be construed with reference to the preceding objects of publication, expressly enumerated, viz.: the obs^prvance of holy days or fast days, celebration of the communion, banns of matrimony, briefs, citations and excommunications; and applies to those objects or to other matters ejusdcM fjv.neris" I ain happy to state, for the information of his Lordship, that this opinion i^ signed by no less a person than Mr. A. J. Stephens, of whom he has so high an opinion ; the other gentleman who signed it is Mr. Richard Jebb. I trust that I have dealt with this subject in a fair and open manner. I want thq Clergy to feel that there are questions of great interest to them, as well as to the Laity, involved in this discussion. There are people, and I think that I may say that there are reverend gentlemen who heard me the other day, who, if they would not excomnmnicate me for the views I have thrown out, certainly would do something nearly as bad, if they had, the power. One of these gentlemen has published that I used language towards his Lordship which was not fit' to be nsed. I appeal to you, gentle^ien, to say whether his Lordship was vilified by me. While I spoke openly and fearlessly, I did not abuse my position. Hereafter, it seems, we are to elect our own Bishop, and this is to be done through the Synod. We may g^t better Bishops in this way, but I am not quite sure of that. The most * prominent and influential ^ — — j_ ...^. , ,,,„_. ,_ ..jti5;-,i Slates, uur inc most active and energetic Cardinal elected Pope. ' < 1 '■ •,.1 ■'1 tf i 'u R4 14" In tliP liuo t'lmion ot' Uishnp ut ^^ihIkh',- I niul tliiit llie Liiity wi.-*hcy way of eoinproinirtc. If this Synod movonifiit is adopted, and our Bishops are hereafter elecrted, we may lia\e. a weak'niiinlcd man ehosen Hisliop : Jie may not ilrivp men out of tlie (-hnreh. hut In- will keep men from eomin": into it. It may he, liowever, that there are ineii who would rather liave ahsolulc power with a snuvll Cliurch. than /'n *'/»/»)( with a Chureh extended over the whoU; country. — some wlio desire < ,;-l( sindi'-i* to be everythiiifr in the Church. It reminds me of an old ('ler;jryuiaii very many years a;ro, the R^'Ctor ot Annapolis, who was very anxious to liave a stately steeple on Iu9 church, and ur^rinjr his views on his parishioners, he said, "'(iive me a handsome steeple, if I support the The fiishop. — No. measure. Ihen what shall we say of their unanimity in their votes in the Awem bly ? Would there or would there not have been that un^ mmny, had the discussion of the Bill taken place first Ihere SuCZ cZroZ^ nT''""l '^^^ ^'^^^y °^ '^'-^''^^^ he may say of Zse Churchmen here who are opposed to the Bill, " Pretty Churohmen th^ • indeed, to oppo.sc their Bishop-they are in my way-but I have^ot a set of Churchmen that I do like : look at them and dress yo,,r 'elves br hem." I dare say his Lordship feels towards them as a^mother doe« X^rJv'7''T,'?^V""'''P'^'"^^"'*'''3''^hey are almost oo good to live; and h,s Lordship fears that if they do go back to the countnr «ome of them may be lost. His Lordship saysf" I have got a elm' youmay w,n this heat, but I am sure to win at last." Well MlW rehg^oas matters, and those who seem to lead may find that they are led The Bishop says that you must take the Bill as it is, that he cannot have any amendments. When the Bill was before the other Houre h?s Lordshjp «a,d that he would not stop at the present amendment buJ that ,f there were any other parishes that were opposed to the Synoi he would exclude them. Will he put such a clause Tthe Bill noW ChiiZ i."" •°°' ^ "^P^^^e^t here. I etand here to represent erery Churclunan who is opposed to such a Synod, as is asked for by S BUI. I know no man more ardent for the Bill than the Rector of St Luke's, and yet I know that there are many in that parish oppord tol ' I presume that ,n many of the parishes said to be in fevour ofthe S^od there is a conside-able number opposed to it. ^/"-ou,. His Lordship ha^ said that coercion has been uswl. He told you ^.at very unreasonable conduct has been exercised by the parish of St Paul's, towards their Curates. I wiU explain that case to you^ St Paul's has always been opposed to the Synod movement. The late SirBrenton "ove™Th° ".' ?' 'T ^'- ^°^"«" P*-^*^^ *^'°«* St- Panics governed by the Synod. Now, what was done by the Curat«s, not bf the Rector, who, as Rector, is above the control of the Bishop, as he is aboye the control of the Laity ?■ The parish has the power of^^intVe h.m, but neither the parishioners nor the Bishop have any Xer™^ remove hmri, except for such reasons as are recognized on le^l grounds of nuUinTtf '?' r"'' ^rt'- '^"'^ P^^hionfrs of St. R^FsfiS :f;rilli'l_'"'-'r-"" ''' — *"'' of Buppordng his Curates, 'say, Wj , ;i:^"'V ""'' "* "'''^ cQiireiy, ana Uie other partly, but we mn«t nominate them, and they mu.t be under us a. weU i undir you NS^t 4. I i\ 'n ^^'i #1 ir J / * 4 . .;■■' •> 1 H 6C) tlo you tliiuk of these ji^entleraeti insistin;! on attcndinir the Synod, an'l C'omjinnnisin;^ tiic puri.~h ? The purish pfispod a resolution in Easter 1856, to ask those genth;ineu whether it was tlieir intention to attend the Synod as memhens of that bo ob.,iu,„..„. I ,,o no. know ,?,:.„"»';.,. " i."'^]!, ri"\:' T:^:r'' Iron, ,l,„ very ,„rc of m, oath, i.c can di.sp,;^, ' l^i^itf^ Do h'' stcnco dispense v.itl, it? No p,-oocc,linss ml « T, kL to n^tk n" CTorg^nuan n,pon.iH„ in Coutt of Ju.tico, b_. tl.o r „ sanc-ti tj ^f t 1»WP'. letter of May His Lordship says in this letter that the Synod was only a deliberative asseni.dy I therefore assume that it is still i deULerativI IsTJnMy 1 have therefore no objection to it, except with reference to this BUI ^ ThJ pai^isiuoners of St. Paul's, therefore, and through them the parishioner of >-ova Scotm, might have attended the meetinjs of this Synod sSS that there was no fear of any rules or regulatfons c *iie Syt,d beia jn forced on them, because they had the n^l^rd of th. . diocesan hat n° on ll^l::^::;:!^:^^;-^ -^^ ^^ ^'^^^ better (Mr. Ritchie then read as "Hows : " It will be a deliberative rather than a legislative assembly, until its proceedings are ratified by a^ Act ' Ifr. "l?'- 7'' """^ Governmeut liave''recominended thi mvt c ml Legis ature to pass an Act of this kind for Canada, and doukle " we may obta.r the same, whenever the diocese is prepared to Drcscot a UDanimous application for it,") ^ ^l^^iicu lo picscnt a rathnt ihmrTj 'T^^''':^ '^ ^'^^ '^ P''^^^"* * unanimous appU- 'vuTy.- r^} ^**' ^^"^ majority m favor of this BiU increaS.l v =^::at j,-ui::oii ui u.y arguuicut has not been answered. Hw ^ordship concludes the sentence, part of which I have just read, ♦ 'I 4 f I Ml « I I 68 AA follows : " Accompanied by tlie draft of a Bill previously discussed and agreed upon amonj^st ourselves." He must, therefore, have meant a Bill prepared and assented to by those outside the Synod, as well as those in the Synod. His Lordship now tell'* us that the diocesan Synod have passed a resolution with reference to this Bill. He says that the Synod was never intended to be coercive on ariy body. I can read it iu no other way. His Lordship says that pressure has been exercised. I speak in the hearing of men connected with this House, and also with the other House, I ask them whether any pressure has been exercised, and if so, who has put it upon them. His Lordship tells you that he has put a gentle pressure on members of the Church in both Houses. He has put a pressure on members of other denominations, by telling them that they arc in the same boat with him. Ho put a pressure on this House, when he talked of a body that had met witliin these walls, which had passed away, — talked of the ghost of a body which was now no more, and spoke as if you too might eoon pass away and be no more, if you refused him this Bill. He puts ^ pressure on members of the Govern- ment, — they are told to take care how they behave. There is a gentle pressure on the Opposition, — they are all to bear in mind that an election is approaching ; and to-day, he tells you, that if you do not mind what you are about, there may be an Elective Council, and you do not know- where you may be twelve months hence. Then he tells us that there is a pressure put on the Bishop, by the people of Halifax, but that they are an insignificant set, always behaving badly, that there are only a ▼cry few of them, and that he does not care about their wealth ! Then he tells you (fts he should tell you, or he ought not to be in the ministry at all, if he did not) that, as Bishop, he knows no diiference between the poorest man and the richest. I think he does recognize no such differ- ence. But when I admit that, I also say that he ought not to have come here, and lent himself to foster an idea calculated to promote dissension among Church people. He is the last man that ought to have done it. The tendency of his whole speech was to create dissension. He is willing to cut off St. Paul's, Wilmot, eveiything that interferes with his darling measure. These three thousand men, he says, think they are going to conquer me, — they are putting a pressure on me. Now this forces me into a subject I would rather have avoided. When the Bishop's letter of May, 1856, was written, the parishes of St. Paul's and St. George's comprised the whole of Halifax ; for St. Luke's was then connected with St. Paul's; the letter, therefore, being addressed to the whole parish of St. Paul's, was addressed to the. parish- ioners of St. Luke's also. There is not the shadow of a ground for the charge brought against the people of St. Paul's. The parish of St. Paul's is friendly to, and desirous ol advancing the interests of every 4 69 ui ^ f'::f'°^ o,„h, „„„lre,I and .cv,.„ty p„„„d, °wa» raLcdX h , tund,-«fwl„oh Halifax paid tliKc hundred nad t)nrtv.,ii nound. „J l«".l four l„„ulr„d a„d „v..„fy.',ivo po,m . I am ma i^. ',t, " 1" ■nX i, 1 i-f' '." "'>• "P"""". '»>*>.««», I.i» oliservatio,,, are m„5rf^:;:t;rir]i;ri:rr„idtf^'^::i:t'lS almost hU the widows and orpluitfs rosidcd in Halifax. ' dunng bis Lorclship's remarks on this point I could not Ipli. kina that he was making a most unfortunate reference. He to Id u. indi"^ . nantly, that he would do what waa right, and throw money to I'e do^f -that he would not sell his birthright for a mess of pottLe,-that " ' that he would not give up that which he valued-his contro over tho La.ty and Clcrgy-for money. Is he not in all respect Ike F.-u^5 e has had lus mess of pottage, and now he wants what he cu ithis l..r l.nght. lias he not had all the advantages of gettin-. the moner under those circumstances, with this paper (his letter of ALa^, H5r) io ":::t:;::::^::;::p^ '^^'^-- ^-'^ ^« ^^-^"^ t..is^;esti;^l;u. Suppose that when these funds were spoken of, cvorvbody had .ai >-.icnops iHv power is withdrawn from the Synod. A short time since, mouey was wanted for King's Colle-e Out ct ■f \\ ^^A > ii 70 'fo- 1"7200 raised in tlic \v|i(.l.' I'roviiieo. .£:?S(lO weiv colltH'tcd in Ilallt'ax. or monMliun ()no-li!iIt'(i| tli(> wliolt'. Tlicn tlicre is tin- KmiownuTit Fund. St. Paul's cnntrihutod £Hi}ni towards this fund : tlio parisli nt" St. Govorfrc's. fl-ifiC; tli.- parlsli of Vt. Luk<''s. .€f»;>l ; ami IJisliop RinneyV riiaptd, £'«il. Tlio total sum raised is .1'21.!I2.'") ; of whidi. the Soeiety for tiie propaL'ation of the (Juspel jravo £12'»() ; ]Miss iJiuney £').'>0. Halifax lias j)aid u\^ to this date e")'t50, or more than all the parishes in the I'rovinee have paid in to iho same time. The Endowment P\ind is not for the henefit of Halifax. Itut for the country parishes. Tlunisands and thousands of pounds have hccn subscrihed l»y Halifax, for tlu henetit of tln^ eotintrv, and yet we are told that there is notiiinir hut jealousy <'f the town parishes overridinjr the eonntiy parislies I T do not know ■whether there is anv such feeliiiii or not. I never saw any indication of it : hut if there is, I ask was it his Lordsliip's place to say — I iiive the •wIioU' force of my P>pisco])al sanction to it, and 1 say that I tliink there is irood cause for it? lie should have said to tJic city i)arishes — 1 will not take your monev. 7'/ii- ///s/c.iy). — I did not say that of itiyselt\ hut for the Cliurch. jlfr. Rifrhir. — The diocese has got all this money, and now you say "you will not sell your hirthriirht. 1 am told that the ju-ess supports the promoters of this Synod move- ment. Do T understand his J.ordship to say that the reli;;ious press supports him in this matter? Do you, g^'ntlemcn. say that there is any denomination of Chri-^tians, now that they know what this vSj«iod_ really is. tlial would he favourable to it ? There is good feeling enough among tile different denominations, I should ho])e, not tc desire to impose upou any. other denomination that yoke wiiich they would not impose on themselves I dare say that the organs i '' some of the donominafions may have said that they thought that the Synod v. aS ji good thing. The Methodists have their Conferenees. — the Baptists tlieir Associations. — the TVesIivterians their Synods, — and they would, therefore, naturally say, .the ludding of a Synod by the Cliurch of England is approximating somewhat to themselves. Hut will they now say that they would be content to live under a constitution sucli as that of this Synod? T* there any well-th'inking uian that would be likely to do so? If so, that man, dissenter or not, T care not to what diuomination he belongs, says — ^ want to destroy mv Cliurch. He onlv wants tliis Synod to be fastened on the Church, bec.uise he ^vislles the Church to commit ,i suiiidal act, and he is going to rejoice in its destruction. T think better of lii> •ell- gious press than that, and therefore I do not ludieve that tliey are favor- able to this Synod, as at jtresent coiHtituted. I trust, gentlenv.n. that yon will report unfivorably to this Bill, — that von will withhold vour assent until the various jiari.->hes are unani- mous in its favour, or until the promoter^ of thi~ Synoil movement can .show a platform, on which, men brought up under tlie principles of the "t 71 British constitution cnn meet. Ynn, fortainlv, will not vidd to tluit por- tion ot tho Chuivli which now asks tor tl."is Rill. Wo an; ii'^koil to plare oursolves in th.; hands and nn.lcr the control of tho Bi^l.on to -lecliiro tluit wi> lulieve ourselves unfit to le-islate for tho Church, iin'locause It overturus his ar-iMuent of a previous day, and sustains the views I Jiave taken. lIis arLnimcnt was this, that he Avants this Rill, because he cannot do without it. If his arn^ument now is merely that he wants a Synod to be estal)lisl.ed, all we want him to do is to show us a plat- form on which men of inM I" il acconipanicd wilh tlic sfatoment llr.t tlio IJisiiop carrio'l with imii nil tliis old t't'clcsi;isti(.';il l;\w. Ho was liappy to say tlmt that stafi'iiieiif had liyon sine*! abandoned, and it was now aeknowh'd^od that tlio nld I'Cclcsinstieal laws ■wore not hiiiditi;; in this Province. lie was also bnipvisi'd. and not a little amused, to bt;ar it stated that the canons of ITiO:} cwtcnfh'd to N'ova Scotia. He was spoakini; in the presence of lawyers, and he w;is (piite sure that no lawyer would di^pa'e liis assertion that they had no powei' whatever eitlier in Kiigland or the colonies. Lord (Joke and Sir William IJlacks-ouc had held that they wore not hindin'^ on the people of Enii;iand in nnv seii-e. AVhat was the constitution of the Cinirch of En;^! ind in Nova Scotia? There was a HLshop, and he had certain powers of an o\ti--i'v;r, of visitation, consecration, ordination, and confirniation, whieh, aicordiii;^; to the con- stitution of the Ohur"h, he alone should have. Tn matters of doctrine or discipline tlio ]>i>]iop himself, as well as all other niemhers of the Church, was hound hy the articles and rul.rics in the lionk rtv (riven for the o-eneral benefit of the Church. That uomg tT\e state of matters, he asked liimself what necessity there was for this bill. In a pai)er having official sanction laid liefore the house it was not only admitted that there was no necessity for this legislation, but, it was contemled that the Synod, a.s now constituted, is a vohiut.try association and has the same power over its members which other voluntary as-sociations have over theirs. That was a proposition which he (^fr. J).) admitted. If by this hill the Synod sought only for power to regulate tleir own affairs within their own body, nobody would refuse it to them. But — and this was the worst fe.iture in the bill — the Synod asked for power to deal with persons outside tlieir own body. The ([uestion was now narrowed do'-v; to this — What powers have the Legislature given to other denominations .' The Bishop had said that he only asked for the powers given to other denominations; but yet, there was this strange ineonsistency m his conduct, that although he made this statement, yet in another part of his argument he tells us he cannot agree to leave the Synod to the peoph; t^ be adopted or not as they choose, because he says these Synods are not voluntary as.sociations, but the inherent right of the Church. This would afford a little light on the real nature and object of the bill. The House had been refeiTcd to two or three acts. As regards the ^Vcs- leyan Methodist Act, it ro.'^ted on a contract originally entered into by the mem- bers of that b(i(ly. Every member was supposed to b(M ome n party to that celebrated Deed in Chancery. The legislature had done nothing more than incOTporatc the deiioniin'»tion — they had not profes.'^cd to validate t'lat Deed. •i' 75 (Tlie lion, member Lore road from the private and local ac•t^, pao^e.s 47 and 48. tlio :!id and 4lli soctiuns of the ^Ve^•leyan ^Icthudist Aoi to show that powers wore only conferred to deal with property. ) All tho.'^e acts to which reference had been made were iiieifli/ arts for the regulation of f(j)itporalUiis, and did not touch doctrine or dinripline. It was f^aid that the Church of England was under disabilitiort. an I clmp. r»l of the llevised Statutes, " Of lloli'i;ious Coni:;regations and Socictli.s," was referred to in proof of this. The concluding section of that very chapter read as follows : " Nothing in this chapter shall extend to the Ciiurch of England or to the parislies thereof, or shall afFect tlie lights of its clergymen, olhcers, and parishioners, nor .^Ilall interfere with the spiritual government and d'.-ciplino of any church, further than may be provided for in the deed under which the .sr)ciety or congregation is constituted." Yet in the face of all this it was said that rights were withliohl from tlie Church of P^igland, and the Legislature was now asked to do what this act declared it should nyt do — enfurcu spiritual discipline. (The hon. mendior then referred to the act to ineor{Torate the Roman Catholic l{i>hnp in Halifax, and .showed from the 0th section that it C( nferred no spiritual jurisdiction or ecclesiastical right whatever on him, his successors, or any ecclesiastical person in his Church. J It was said that the bin was precisely the same a.s the Canadian act. Tt tras not, aud the title of it had been changed since it came from the iSynod. The act was then entitled, An Act to enable the members of the Church of England to meet in Synod — a mere enabling act ; now it is a bill to remove doubts concerning the Synod, kc. Originally it said that two lay delegatea should be chosen, without saying that they should be connnunicaiits ; now the bill says that they must be communicants. Again, it appeared by the St. John Church Wit7icss of the 18th March, that the following proviso is in the Canadian act : — " Nothing in this act contained shall authorize the imposition of any rate or tax upon any person or persons what.soever, whether belonging to the said Church or not, or the infliction of any punLslimont, fine or penalty upon any person, other than his suspension or removal from office in the said Church, or exclusion from the meetings or proceedings of the diocesan or general Synod." It was rather significant that this clause should be left out of this bill. Originally the bill took away the power of nominating ministers, and also of controlling their temporalities from the parishes, aud it was only by strenuous efTorts tliat the present provisions had been introduced. There was another peculiarity in the advocacy of the bill, which showed its dangerous scope. The Bishop was at last willing to take it in any shape. [t was the duty of the House to deal with the bill as they found it. The agitation in favour of the bill commenced with the lii.'^hop, hail gone from him to the clergy, and from them reluctantly to the people. Only half the clergymen in tlie province were at the Synod meeting relative to the bill, and t i1 i' * 'I ^r fhf-iij -,:>:■. -.•.;iy ^-^ v; 'h. CJ-" j'i y 76 TiORS than ono-thinl of the 'Jclogates allowed to vote at the Synod, voted ftjr the hill ; and yet it wa« ?aid, forsooth ! that the whole Chiirch asked for it. Under these cirouni.stanccs. he might well ask the House to jwstpone the bill. His ohjection, however, went much further. It was wrong to ask the sanction of the Legislature to laws made by any denomination of ('hristian?. For those reason*, he would ask tho House not to as.sent to the second reading of the liill. HON. M. B. ALMON'S SPEECH. (Churchman.) f- ' ' Fridat, March 27. Hon. Mr. Almon stated that although the bill had been already so fully and ably discus.sed, he felt that it was a duty he c^rcd to himself, not to give a silent vote. He feared that hon. gentlemen of other denominations would not give the bill grave consideration, because they would say that it affected the Church of England alone. He thought, however, that he could show them that it was calculated to attack, if it did not altogether subvert, religious freedom, and that it would also encroach on civil liberties. If this bill were granted to the Church of England, of course other religious bodies would ask for similar acts. No such law had ever before been asked for from the Legislature of Nova Scotia. In looking at this bill, the first question he put to himself was. What arc the acts now governing the Church of England? Was there any necessity for further legislation '! The acts already in exist- ence relative to the Church of England were the act for the incorporation of the Diocesan Church Society, and chap. 50 of the Rev. Stat. Besides that, every paiisii was in itself a corporation — so was the Bishop himself. Iji addition to this the Bishop had told the house that he had a corporation act for himselt' — if it might bo so termed — which was his patent. (The hon. member then went on to refer to these actS in detail, to show that ev(!ry purpose for which laws were needed by the Church was embraced in them.) It was said that the bill was asked for because certain douf/fs existed. As a member of the Church of England, he confessed that ho had never heard any doubts expressed as to the freedom of worship at her churches. It appeared that this bill related to discipline. He asked himself what discipline meant ; and on further examination, he found that the object was to estabash ecclesiastical courts. Those, therefore, who did not comport in i^ 77 '.jMmon with the Bishop and tho members of the Synod, were to be called to account tor any doctrines whi.h they iniirht entertain. The bill also contem- plated that the Synod should have the power of appointment, deprivation and removal ot any person having office in the Church, any ri.^hta of the Cn.wn to the contrary notwithstanding. As far as his (Mr. A. 's) knowledge of legis- lation, either here or elsewhere, extended, he had never heard of an act conferring that power— an act which was to give powers entirely independent ot the ri-hts of the Crown. This appeared to him monstrous in a Church in which he had always been taught that the Queen was at the head of all matters, both evil and ecclesiastical. By the bill, the Church here would be at once withdrawn from the authority of the Queen. He would ask if after the bill w»s passed, the Church here could be called the Church of EnMand? It was selt-evident, that th« Church would be the Church of Nova Scotia As had boon said by the learned advocate who appeared before the select committee, there would then be two Churches here : one under the control of the Synod, which would bo the Church of Nova Scotia; and one which would comprise those dissenting from the Synod, which would be the Church of Lnglaml He hoped and trusted that he should always belong to the Church of England, and should always acknowledge the Que(^ as the supreme head of his Church. He was surprised that his Lord.ship the Bishop should expect the bill to be passed here, without being referred to the Queen— for this House was particularly the body which should see that the rights of the Crown ^^ere not infringed. The mere fact of this clause, trenching on the rights of the Crown, bemg in it, should prevent this House from passing the bill. This Act of the Bishop's was a piece of local legislation— it was also bad legislation, because it had an ex post facto operation— because it affected those who had been members of the Synod already existing. He (Mr. A) called it the Bishop's act, — ^the Bishop himself called it so. The Bishop had repeatedly said that the Church people in the conntry were as one man in asking for the act,— that the opposition was only from Halifax. He (Mr. A.) had himself asked the Bishop, and he had been asked m other places to insert a clause in the bill to give the parishes m the country until Easter, 1864, to decide whether they would be bound by it. He (Mr. A.) was astonished that his Lordship would not consent to this, but said that he had nearly all the parishes now, and. that he would keep them. Was not that sufficient to alarm any man's mind? It was said that the Laity were represented in this Synod. He consider- ed that the Laity would soon, under the operation of the Bill, be a mere nullity. He believed that the Laity were generally ignorant of the nature of the Bdl. -They had not asked for it. The Bill had come from the Bishop ' himself, who had told the Clergy (they not knowing it before) that they wore suffering for want of the Bill. Fearing that the Laity might hereafter under- stand the real nature of the Bill, tho constitution of the Synod provided that they ebouid u« rwuio ved at the pleasure of a majonty, as it said "that the Laitj > ' Ji ..\\ «• 1 t 'I 4 ^1 n 1 >-i II shnnlil meet Vy rfiiro<;i:nt;itinn mttl it should be otherwise determined bt/ the Stf- nod. IIo (Mr. A. ) !::i(i Ix-on and still was a nionil)or nf tliis Synod, liavinnj re- presented from its ('onimon''omL'nt one uf the country {uirislics, and lie, there- fore, knew wjniethinn; of its operations. His ^'[\t fear v ith rcppect to the liill wns exproswd in tlio report of the select coniniitteo, wliiidi represented tlie unnninifnis opinion of himself ami oolleajnics, that it would cre»t« disunion and divide the Church. ('J"he hen. p:intl"»nnn tlien etated that \m Lordship the Hi>hop, hy way of coniproniise with the parish of 8t. Paul's, hiid inserted a clause in the bill which was not in it when paisscd hy the ^ynod, and had therohy exceeded his powers. This clause exempted from the operation of the hill St. Patd's and St. Georpe's, and any other parish hitherto unrepnesented in the Synod, which should express its desire at or l)efore Easter, 1804, to he oxetudod. Hon. Sol. (ioneral interrupted to say that he understood that the bill had been introduced into the assembly exactly as prepared by the Syimd, but that dOabta and Tlitficultiea havint; arisen, this clause was suggested by members of tho assembly, and a(5quiesce. In the (lin<-o.c of Ontario the purisheh hud formerly, as thov mHI have here the pnv,l.'p, nt nnmmi.ting thoir own ministers. The first ac't of the Synod of()ntnno,,.,.,o,M;v..rt,pall the Church patrnnnge t. the J?ishop~aml the fi,^t aet of the } ,>hnp wa.s to give one of the host parishes, a^ain«t the willofahnost hovvhol.of that parish, to a gentleman who h.d strenuou.^ly exerted himsoU iii his favour in tlio eanvas f„r the hishnpric Thid was another in..taneeotthrpn»efieal working of these .^ynod.s and .h.,uld cause Jie house to pan,o hcfore they passed the Bill. (The hon. gcmlonian, then, alluded to tt.e ehui^o m the Canadian act, referred to hy hen. Mr Pickev which, he thou,n:l,t, ^he..!d he in this bill.) Ho had already ohscr\-cd ia the ^vnod f,ometlim;r like :,n effort to dispen.sc with the hiity alto-ether. By the (-onstitutiou, as originally framed, a measure had first to he passed hv a majority et the elergy. and then by a majority of the laitv, hut at the List meeting a re.-ju.ticn had been carried that the clergy an.i laity should vote in one body, and as the clergy quite outnumbered the luity, it was easy to sec where the majority would be. If the bill were passed, the Synod would becume a miniature Legislature, for there was no appeal from its declsion.s Jt the liou.se were to take his Lordship's arguments at one time, and his arguments at an.^ther time in his address to the Committee, no better answer would be re(piired to the application for the Bill. It had been said that the Bill was required to free the Church of Endand here from state restrictions. Ho did not see that the Church was encumbered by any such restriction,. The Bishop had shown his cleverness and ability in his arguments before the Committee. Where his points were weak he bad skimmed them over with great adroitness, and on his stronger points he dwelt with great force. He (the Bishop) had been told that the main thine, to which the opponent" of the bill objected was the veto. In his speech before the committee he said very little about it. except that it would be a draaumn hasty legislation. He (Mr. A.) was afraid that it would not be used in that way very often. The Bishop (and he said it with all due reapeet) was not justified in saying that the wealthy men of Halifax were pressing on him to do that which wm inimical to the interests of the country parishes, and that one of his chief rea- sons m asking for the Bill was, that he might be freed from the pressure of the monied aristocracy of the city. He (Mr. A.; felt a little hurt at that statement. Funds were raised by members of the Church for the Wocesan Church gociety and for the Church Endowment Fund— to the latter of which several gentle^ men in Halifax h,id g.ven £500 as their individual subscription Every far- thing of the .noney raised for the IHocesan Church Society had gon- to the country pari.-hes.-^not a farthing of it had been retained for St. Paul's parish Ihere never bad been a complaint from any one of the country parishes of unuue iuauvuw. They had always been content with the division made, and 'i »• .i '"1 . ti J." i ' M #1 '•^ ■' * •t^ 80 which was alway.s nia I i M w I'M** 82 fortunity of knowing what was to be done, ly (lie laws rcgulultiig such mat- tcrs their silonoo was their cnnsont, unless thoy at once made some protest ai^ainst it. Ho thought that law governed this body. He understood one o( the hon. gentlemen who o|iposod the Bill yesterday to say thut the Cburcb people were ignorant of its nature. Was that so'.'' He (Sol. (jron'l.) had Leon tiught from his childhood to beliovo that the Church people were an in- tcdligent and edueated people. They had an organ, ami as a body lie believed that they knew perfectly well what was going on with respect to this measure, and understood it just as well as the Baptists of Nova Scotia would under- !^nd a measure touching their interests which had been published in their organ and discussed therein for three niontlis. He was asked to rescue Churchmen from thoni.>^elves. That was not his mission. He had been led to believe, until he saw the Bill, that the Synod was already organi:',ed, and that the object of the Bill was to legislate for an organization already in ex- istence. That, however, was not flie nature of the Bill. The Synod was ;to meet af}er the pa-ssagc of the Bill, t< frame a Constitution. Both hon. gentle- men who addressed the House yesterday had spoken of the veto as an objec- tion to th«' Bill. The argument was a fallacy. The Bill authorized the Sy- nod to organize for itself. Tlic Constitution had yet to be framed. The Bill did for the Church people just what any incorporation act did for the mem- bers of the corporation, — enabled them to meet to form their own rules and re- gulations. If the Bill had asked for legislation for a previous organization, he raigbt have stayed his hand, but it did nothing of the kind. It appeared that those who opposed the Pill had not confidence enough in the members of their own body .to bi'lieve that they would frame a suitable (Constitution and Bye Laws. Th.ot, he thought, jfas a fair, legitimate sequence from the style ot their ar- gument. That was not very compHmentary to themselves, and he assumed tliat in this age of enlightenment, and taking Churchmen sittijig here as sam- ples of their body, that Churchmen generally were perfectly able to take care of themselves, and that no un.suitable rules would bo passed by the Synod. It might be said, "Judge them by what they have done already, — tliey have given the Bishop his veto before, and they will do So ngaiU." He was not prepared to say that they would not, nor was he prepared to say that it would no« be a wise thing if they did so. He would ask these Churchmen who opposed the Bill to answer this question. What is the juridical power of a Bishop in af colony V Was he in •the same relation to the parishes, people, and communicants as a Bishop in Eiwland ? If not, let the opponents of the Bill point out the diifercnoe. Didf the Bishop4iere, where not interfered with by our Statutes, possess the same power as a Bishop in England ? If so, then he wa.s by this Bill givin/j; up a large portion of his power. If so, he (Sol. Gen. ) could not understand whtt there was in this measure which alarmed members of tlie Church of Knglaed. He would remind boo. geittlemea that clwrchos were delicate pieces of nw- I 88 ^Innory an.! tWt (hose disputes goncrate.J wl.oro there wis th least rml .V h uufrhtL thai a fwfon of th7 ?, r'^"';*?-''^* '^'' antagonism existed. would lo to brin- down lu.on f "v t! w "^ *''''"S'^* ''''' ''^^"It in.possibl.. to resist ^ I^g'^lature a power which it would be But why should meniLers of other denominations omM^vo the 71ill'> T. fourth clause prov dod tl\at tho lilll .K....1 1 ^"'""7 "PP*''^ the JJill ." ihe t<. be! exclude. W ^^^0; ttw 1," 1 'T'^ " ",'"''""" '^''^'''^^ '^«^«-« I.arishes an^ Kpis«>paTcWh "^^ILTou"' -»b,ned-.ndependenec of thf .lan.er'o?r Jeei'"the1i f ^'''* l^r^^""'"' ^"^ ^' ^«"'^' "«* ««^ ^1- /?^e.t ho .night'^^oXl^^ntrr^X a^^^^ "^sZld'^t^f, 'T^'' '''''' tlmt the Bishoo and 'Jlerev had at he- rtnl . T • ""l* ^''? ^''"'*' ^^""'« (Ihe hon. gentleman then went on to comment on the remarks of non Some discussion ./wk place between thn linn ««„*i 1 , \Ii>ion on this nnmf Tki^i-n . ^*^'^" ""' "''"■ gentleman and hon. Mr -eting. though not approving the cTauso ) ' "' ' ^'^"^^ ^'^' '^" ** I'^"''^ , much less the practical operation of the Bill. That, at all events, was the case with a great many persons in his parish. If the Bill passed, the people would wake up bye and bye, and see to what they had bound themselves. The Solicitor General had referred to the Presbyterian and Wesleyan Methodist Acts, and had tried to make it appear that the Bill contained nothing more than those acts contained. To show that such was not the case he would read two sentences referring to this Bill, from the St. John Church Witness (The hon. gentleman then read as follows from the Church Witness of March 18, 1863— " It binds all parishes thet have been represented under the first consti- tution to retain their connection with the Synod under this Bill of incorpora- tion, whether approving of it or protesting against it. Instead therefore of its being a Bill of incorporation for the existing Synod, it is a Bill imperilling the civil rights of the clergy, the connection of the laity with the Assembly, and the liberties of the parishes to judge and determine for themselves.'') The Bill came here with a lamb-like appearance — very innocent. The Solicitor General told the house that tliere was nothing in it — only a simple Bill to remove doubts — doubts, which he (Mr P.) contended, never in fact existed. But when you examined, analyzed, and stripped the Bill of its covering, you found a ravenous wolf in sheep's clothing, calculated to destroy the freedom, iiberty, and inde|)endencc of 50,000 Churchmen in the Province of Nova Scotia. His Lordship told the committee the other day that he had the Synod now, and had as much right now to hold his courts aa any judge in England. If that was the case, where was the necessity for the Bill? His Lordship, however, was not saliHbed with his present power, but pressed for this Bill : % i 85 H;id not the house, tlion. a just right t(. pupposo that something was to grow out of the Bill to give him additional poworY A Bi.shop who had once obtained power had never been known voluntarily to relinquish it. Bishops were mortal as well as parishioners and they might, from the effect of an overtaxed brain, carried away by some fantaptic notion or frenzy, do things of which their parishioners disapproved. If a man possessed real estate, either by purchase or inheritance, he seldom disposed of it without an equivalent. If he had privileges they might be more valuable than property , and when once irans- terred, he need never expect to recover them. It was therefore necessary to be cautious. Caution and i)rudeiice had been his guide hitherto, and he thought the hou.se should be cautious how they passed a Bill which would deprive Churchmen in Nova Scotia of valuable privileges, not only now but for generations to come. The^ Bishop had told the committee that this act was like the Canadian act. Now Churchmen in Canada formerly possessed the right of cheosing their own minister; but when that act was pa.^sed, and a Synod was establish- ed in the diocese of Ontario, the patronage was handed over to the Bishop, and he said to the parish of Kingston, " The privilege of oppointing your minister is mine, not yours ; and T .shall appoint a certain individual whcthfr you like it or not." He would not say that the present Bishop" would abuse the power he would obtain if the Bill were passed, but he had no lease of his life. Though he (Mr. P.) hoped that he would live long, it was possible that he might soon have a successor. His Lordship had spoken of the canons of 16f>3. They were pretty rusty now, and he (Mi. P.) did not think the Church people of Nova Scotia need fe^ir a shot from them, and even if his LordJhip did fall back on them, he thought there were Church people in Nova Scotia who would march to the catinon's mouth and bid him defiance. — (Laughter.) Hie Lordship had said that he had used no undiK influence in pressing for the passage of the Bill. It appeared that ho had been before the com- mittee of the Lower House, and ad(b-os,sod them for two or three hours. That might not be called undue influence, — he (Mr. P.) would leave that question to the judgment of the house, but he thought it was descending beneath the dignity of a Bishop to do so. His Loi-dship had compared this house to the old Council of Twelve, -and had said that if this Bill were not passed now, he would it bring up year after year, if it was for 14 years, until it was pas.sed. It should never pass with his (Mr. P.'s) eonseiit, however often it might be brought up. His Lordship had also reminded the committee that the old Council of Twelve had obstructed public opinion for a hnig time, until they were finally turned out ; and hinted that if the presont Council did not give the Bill a* favorable consideration, they might meet the same fate, and have to give place to an elective body. This threat did not trouble him (Mr. P.) much. :1 0*\ If . ,;jOi mure »»as no niorc uecOoMiy iui- iiie iini uow, than there was ■ 'I 86 It v. one limi.li.'J years ngo ; ;iiin)pcrty which now became vested in the united body it was thought desirable to have an act. Was the object of that act to' enforce discipline, to give Legislative authority tc the removal of office-bearers ' No there was no smidanty whatever between that act and this. Even in that act' so jealous had the Lo,o-.sl;,ture been of intcifercnce with the rights of dissen- tients that It provided that any v. ho had dissented from the Union, or should hcreaftor dissent from it, .vhould be excluded from the operation of the Act \\itli referehce more particularly to the bill under oonsiih ration, if there wore any doubts as to liow the Church was governed, and the Church „unite.l'y a.^^kc.l fur the bill,_(notwithstan(ling that he thought there wa'^ no necessity for -t, f.a- he believed it to be a bad principle to be le.nslatin.^ fur the government of churches)— still he thought nobody would object to it tie did not think, however, that either of the conditions he bad indicated existed. _ The house had been told of the unanimity m favor of the bill, and the Solicitor General had attempted to show that unanimity. Where were the proofs of It V 28, or about one half of the Clergymen in the Province, had voted for the bill, and 7 against it. Presuming that those who were absent trom tlie bynod were divided in sentiment in the same proportion as tho-e present, there would be about 14, or one-fourth, which was a considerable proportion, of the whole body against it. Another piece of evidence against the as.«erted unanimity was the report of the committee on the bill. That committee was composed of Churchmen •me from the city, one from the eastern, and one from the western part of the Province. Had not the House a right to suppose that those gentlemen when they said there was a want of ttnanimity, had a better opportunity of iudoin.- tiian members belonging to ojher denominations? . •' -> o o A still further piece of evidence of the same character was the fact that this very question of Synods was agitating the Church fvf England elsewhere Even Bishops were divided about it.. The Bishop had told the committeo that he wanted this bill passed, because another Bishop might want to do away with the Synod. Was the House to legislate t(^ compel a Bishop to give up a Synod, when he did not want to do so, or to have him aekiiia tor a repeal »>f tins act '( ' If there was to be agitation with regard to the bill, he thou^I-t it better that It shouki take place /fefore the bill passed. *" ^ It was said that if this bill were rejected, injustice would be done to i iruM.iiMicn. ii iju beiieved tiiat that would le the case, he would be the »-;i J *.M ^.H il ••3 V* « 88 last man to vote against it. IIu did not enter into tlio ((uciition of whether the bill gave the IJishop nmre or lens power. lie knew that Episcopalian- thought that the IJistiop should have power. Some of them niiglit oppose the bill, on the ground that it took power from the Bii^hop, others on the oppowte ground. lie did not think he wa.s doing any injuhtice in allowing Eeopio to Hottlo their own affairs ; and it would he time enough to grant tKo ill when the Chureh madt; a united application for it. He had arrived at these view.* dispiissionately. lie di.'^e.laimed in the strongest terms any hostility to the, Chureh of England, either by word or deed. lie regarded her with an attliMion secoml only to that he felt for his own denomination ; and ho could not do otherwise, when ic considered the men of piety and iutolligenco formerly and still within her fold. * • • i REMARKS OF HON. W. C. WIUFMAN. (M.ihodU.) Hon, Mr. Whitman observed that he should not perhaps have spoken at all, but ior some observations made by the Sol. General, with regard to th'j petition presented by the lion, member from Halifax (bon. Mr. Almoii). He was satisfied that by the present laws all denomination.^ had the power to hold property, and to worship the Creator according to the dictates of their own conscience. " Equality to all denominations — ascendaixcy to noue," was the order of the day in Nova Scotia. There did not appear to be any strong reason why the bill should be made a matter of so great importauo*. It was well known that the Church of England bad managed their affairs well without the bill ; and they could certainly do so a little longer. The petition alluded to by the Sol. Gene- ral was a t>rin br<>tln-r of one which he (Mr. W.' had pre.«;ented from the Rector of Wilmot and the oHice-bearers of bis Church. The former petition was .signed by the same person.^ in their individual capacity, and also by many others. In order to make .he juitition appear more respect- able, it had been transcribed ; but he luul no doubt that it had originally been signed by all the parties v.-liose names were attached to it ; and the fact of their having done so could no^ be disputed. The hon. member from Cumberland (hon. Mr. Pineo) did not ap- pear to be much frightened at lie idea of an elective council. For him- self, he would say that, having been requested by the Rector and Church Wardens of Wilmot to present a petition against the bill, and having heard nothing in favor of it from any of the Church people of his county, he should vote against it ; and .should on that ground, if the Council were made elective, claim the votes of all the Church people of Aana- pOiio cOuuiy. 89 «j REMARK'S OF HON. JOHN HOLMES. (< %.,:}, of Scotland.) Hon. Mr. Holmes could rpnicmbi-r the time when the ascendancy of the Chiii-ch of Eiifrlaud was a favorite theme tlirou'rh )iit tlie length and ImiadHi of the province, at.d when tlieir property mil institutions were assailed, and he had then defendegal efricafv t<. the deri.^ions of their (hurch courts. He (IVfr. I).) n.iild iina;jino tho .position which tin- hariicd gentle- man would take, if u hir-e ho.ly of iJaptist ministers eame to this House tor an Aet to enaMe them to enforee discipline on him. Ne (Mr. 1). ) could oasdy fanev the indignant tones witii which he would i verse his J.osition and ..ay, - Xo, ] ,,m a Baptist ; T am eout.i.t |.. worship with you wlnle unfettered I)y Le-Ishitive enactment : l.nt tlu^ uioment vou say tliat you are -o.n^r („ ^^overn the church hy hl^v, I am in my cons.-ienco no longer a free num." The li(.n. -vnnemau iiad .-aid. "what have otlier dcnoniinatjons to lo with this matter?" In r..|dy to this .lUeMiun. lie (Mr. D.) cimld add very little to tls.- nI,Mr\:ilions .d his lion, frimd (h.)M. Mr. Patterson) V, ho had made iiis maiden spei'di this evening. In the ol.l times to which the hou. n.cmlu.r from ri.-toii had alluded, so great had been the .lealousy of the Clmreh of England that the whole province, fnmi its centre^ to Its eireumf.renc-. had been agitated bv the celebrated parish bill, the object of which was simply to divide a parish, and the hou. Sol <.oneral was himsc-lf one of the most violent opponents of that very rea- sonabl.. measiire. He need not say that had the Church of En-rland then asked ior legislation to enable her to create Church courts, to exer- cise disciplme over all her members, the demand would not have been listened to for a moment. It might be very convenient lor 'politicians KUd others now to take a dirtorent line. The opposition to the bill rested on the broad ground (and this he, Mr. U., had stated when he made the motion to defer the bill) of the impolicy ■ and impropriety of legislating so as to give legal sanction to the decisions ot Lhurch cuurts. No attempt of the kind had .-ver been made in this I rovince. He had called the attention of the House to this, and had pointed out the act respecting religious congregations, whieir stated on lis lace that it should not conier the power of excrcisin"- discipline The act mcorporating the Koman Catholic Bishop contained a' similar pro- \iJio. Yet 111 the face of these acts the house Avas now asked to pass a bill lo give this very jjower of enforcing discipline, and no answer had oeen given to the arguments on that head. The hon. member from Halifax (hen. Mr. Almon) had asked. " If these Synods are now legal, why is an act sou-rht ior ?" No answer had been given to that question ; but he (Mr. J).)' would give two answers. In the first place the decisions of the Synod at present had the same force as the decisiuns of the conferences or associations of other deiuuninations; tlnit was, they rested on nurc voluntary consent. ]}nt as this bill created u iribumil which miglit remove otiiee-bearers, it was necessary that the :'H 91 J.u^or ofhiw ..Imm.1.1 Im- -ivoi, to it, ^o n^ to -Ivc Rn-ator forro to if. ih. .•ision.s thuri ^^us oMcu.lr.l to iI.o.m, of otl.or dLMiouunati...,,.. I„ tin. j.r.,n.l plmv tl... 15,.1h,,. at proMM.t had certain rights and .vr.aiu dutie.! He (iMr I).) wjus a-^IuMl by the hoii. .srentleinan on the other si.le to -{ye ■i h'jinl dj^ertat.oi. on the powers of a I}ish..p. He did not propo.se to do that h.8 eveiung, l,ut fhi.s act would gi'^e the legal maehinery for eu- loreii'g hus views. •' Jfon. Sol. r,V,,r.„/._If the Synod has the power of law now, what uji.re power will It have if the bill pas>? Hnn Mr Dirh,,, w„uld answer the hon. gonth-nmii. ^Vithout tho I'll tlie hywn\ was a mere voluntary association ; and its de.isionH b.jund oiiJy those who met in Synod— but the bill extended its operation to those who Were iioi nifiiibers. JI<»}. Sul. (icncraL—Tho^ii persons are exempted. '(''^'■M'-. I>,rhy replied that tho bill exempted oniv cv.rhun parishes, .ut that It stil arteete.l the minorities in the represenf.l parislies. Ho Mr U.) might retort the argument, and sav, li the Synod can now h'gai y meet, why asLthe Legislature to stultify itself by pussin- a law v.liicli lias never been conceded to other denominations?' ., ,.„//*"!■ f^'»^"''i' '''ist de-ree. With reganl to matters bro..^ before the Synod, his power w^s qualified ; i.u hestilhadhis iv7o,'»nd his episcopal power, as Bi..hop, was left imtouclieii. * He was rofiM-red to the exemption clauses. That ex(-nn)tion was ■•onhned exclusively to parishes hitln-rto unrcpresenti'd : but what about the nmiority of 7 out of ;{.') pjirishos that were represented, for it appeared that that was the number of ministers wlio attended the Synod when the bill was voted for. They might very well say, "We met in voluutnr,, >yiioa, but seven of us, representing seven parishes, ol)jecfed to a bill which was to enforce liy law tho decisions of the Synod." Was the attendance of those seven ministers to be contorted into an admission by their parishes of tJ.eir assent to be bound liy the bill ? If tlu' 4jill were passed they woiild undoubtedly be bound l)y it. The poliri/ <,/ tl,c Leqidatun; irilli ren-rh of Englaml % 1 "•!/°. "''''"■ '^(^^ominaiionH, hu^ ere,- been thi^ " Ohnnh matters awl i,kHrch disapliw ,re leare ijon to settle amontf yourselvrs, hut In reference to property ire ;/,rr ynu the same rights o, nn>, other volvntar,, nssoeiation, svrhas imuraner mmpanies, * I^.Mfe.\^ii^ IMAGE EVALUATION TEST TARGET (MT-S) V.' // / / i '^A^ v ^ ^1? <» II I.I 11.25 1 2.2 1.4 2.0 1.6 y] %. /] .V' ^h V '/A 1 • Sciences Corporation 33 WEST MAIN STREET WEBSTER, N.Y. 14SS0 (716) S73.4S03 V ■1>^ <^ is ;\ ^■^^ % <^ 4^ 1 rv ht 1..^ y r ■f J* ^»;' 92 The report of the committee stated tliat tlic passa^rc of the bill would lead to strife and disunion. He thought the experience of the last two or three weeks justified them in making that statement. He congratidated hon. members on the almost unanimous feeling of the house to leave the Churcif of Englarsd people to manage their own affairs, and he hoped that the bill would ])e deferred in order that the members of the Church might have au opportunity of coming to some agreement among ttiemselves. The House then divided on the motion to defer, when there ap- peared — For thf; motion — Hon. Messrs. McNab. Anderson, Archibald, Pineo, Comeau, Whitman, Dickie, Almon, Patterson, Tupper, Holmes, Dickey, Black, Keith, Cutler— lo. Against it — Hon. Messrs. McCully, McHei!l;y, Brown, Hon. Presi- dent — 4. The bill was accordingly deferred. (Hon. Mr. McdCeen's name was subsequently added to the majority at his spox-ial request.) Mr. Creighton one of the committee on the Bill was absent. [The pith of the whole matter as regards the Legislature lies in the italicised paragraph of the Hon. R. B. Dickey's Speech,] S' --i7s--,^~'^- I'-* m W -■-.;, -1 i-tl- ■' 'fk AN ACT •I To INCORPORATE THE DIOCESAN SYNOD OF NOVx\ SCOTIA. (Passed the 2^GS, PARISH OF ST. PAUL'S, IN MARCH, ISjCJ. t; C' I* ' The followinrr arc the rcsolut- .us passed by a lari;v majority at tl.r Easter meeting of St. Paul's parisli, I\iarfli 24, 1k:,(;, aiul the replies n{ »hc Curates to the first resolution, reft^rred to hy Mr. Ritchie. Also, the resolution })a.ssetl at the adjourned meeting on the 28th iMurch, after the replies of the Curates had been read. Bishop Binney^s letter to the majority referred to by Mr. Ritehie. is hIso added, it luivi»g special reference to the resolutions and replies ui the Curates. A careful reading of the Bishop's letter, and espe/'isilly some of the italicised parts, catmot tail to convince the reader that the promises and •assurances therein contained have not bccti strictly adhered to. The following resolution was moved by J. W. Ritchie, and seconded by Dr. Jennings, viz. :— Resolved, That application be made to the clergvmen officiating in the Parish of St. Pauls, to ascertain whether it is their intention to attend the Synod as members of that body while so officiating, and if so, whether it is tlieir intention to carry out, or assist in carrying out, within this parish, the resolutions, or canons, or any of the regulations passed at any of the meetings of the Synod. The following resolution was then moved by A. M. Uniacko. and duly seconded, and passed by a majority of 18. Twenty-seven votin" for it, and nine against it, viz. :— • "" Whereas, — By a Resolution passed at a General Meeting of tiie Parish on the 15th September, 1854, it was considered iojudi'cidus to establish a Synod ; And Wlierras^— At a General meeting of the Parish, held in April 18.00 It was resolved !->That this Parish will not be represented at such ISyn^ds : Therefore^ /)p it Hesohed,— That this Meeting still entertain the same cpuuon, and deem it inexpedient to elect Representatives to attend th.' Oiocesaii Assembly of Nova Scotia. f^^m?' jSSirfiii^Li^k I Adjourned Tnetting, March 2S.] llEPLT OF THE RliV. MU. BL'f.LOCK. .a Halifax, March 2fitli, l8o6. Dear Sir. — To the licsolution enclosed to tnc this day, I desire to give an immediate and most unequivocal reply. As a Christian Pastor, I gladly admit the oblicratinn to do everythinir in my power for the general welfare of the Clutreii and of tlic Parish of St. Paul's in particular. With this obligation in remembrance, I have promoted the instituljon of the Diocesan Assembly, and assisted in framing it;? constitution ; under the same influence I intend (God willing) to exerciHe my right as a Presbyter of Nova Scotia to take part in its future dolibt-rations, and to record my vote as my conscience shall dictate, and with the hope, by God's help, to serve the cause of Christ and his Church. And further, it is my decided purpose to observe and carry out all the canons and ordinances of the said Assembly or Synod ; ahvavs saving the undoubted lule of Christianity to " obey God rather than man. " You will be pleased to communicate my decision to the meeting on Friday next, and believe me. Yours tery truly, m ^* T, . , ^ William Bullock. To Mr. Daniel Gallagher, Vettry Clerk, KEPLT OF THE REV. MR. MATtmiN Halifax N. S., March 26, 1856. Gektlemek, — I have received a copy of the resolution passed at the meeting of the parishioners of St, Paul's with reference to the intention? of the clergy of this parish, as to the pYoposed Synod, or "Diocesan As- sembly of Nova Scotia." I perceive that the first jpbject of inquiry is, " Whether it is our intention to attend the Synodf as members of that body ; *' and I beg to say in reply, that as? that assembly is cffnvened by the" highest ecclesias-' tical authority, I feel myself bound, in conformity with the vows of my ordination, to obey the call of my Diocesan, by attending these meetings, and if it please Gdd to spare me in life and henlth, I slinll be happy to devote my humble Abilities to the promotion of the best interests of the Cliurch by aswsting in all its deliberations. Bdt there is a further inquiry, as to '• Whether it is our intention to TV oat, or assist in carrying ont irHhin this parish, the resolutions or ions, or any of the regulatiofts, paf*ed at any of the meetings" of the I. [ » ir it 4 I m \m 96 ii.-' Assembly. Kow, on tlii.-. point it soems to mo impossible to give a satis- factory answer to the inquiry, as it will depend entirely on the nature of the regulations that may be made, and aS I am totally ignorant of the subjects which may oeeupy the attention of tlie asseinbly. I wish it to be distinctly tmderstood, however, that I do not consider myself pledged to support the resolutions which may be adopted at such meetings, and I must decline to compromise myself by any prospective engagements of this kind. I can only say that i have sufficient confidence in the wisdom aud piety of its members to entertain a strong hope that nothing will be carrjfd by the decision of that body which may require me to offer any opposition to the result, especially- as it is a fundamental principle in the constitution of the assembly, that none of its regulations can by any means interfere with the doctrine or discipline, the Articles or Liturgy, of the Church of England. Still, however, I must observe that I do not commit myself to any particular course of action by attending the proceedings of the assembly, and I trust that I shall ever be enabled, by the grace of God, faithfully to oppose every attempt that may be made from whatever source to injure the true evangelical character of our Church, or to impair the religious liberties of the L«ity or Clergy of her communion. Without entering into any discussion of the general principles involv- ed in the question, I miust be allowed to express my deep regret that the Diocesa* Assembly will be deprived of the benefit of the counsel and advice of the four Representatives of this Parish, who might have been expected, from their superior iptellectual and moral qualifications, to have rendered the most valuable services to the Church by their cordial co-ope- ration. I need scarcely say that I feel the highest degree of personal respect and affectiofl for my Christian brethren of the laity who have con- scientiously taken a different view of the subject. I am sure that I am fully disposed to make all due allowances for their prejudices, and I sincerely trust that no difference of opinion on this point will ever be permitted to break the bond of brotherly love that exists between us as members of the mystical body of Christ. At the same time, however, I must observe that it appears to me premature to decide against a plan w^hich has not yet been carried into operatioa ; and I cannot but think that the better course would be to give the p^posed system a fair trial, and thus to judge of its merits by actual experience of its practical work- ing, which would afford the best opportunity of testing the expedience and propriety of suoh periodical meetings. After all, however, I must say that not having been present at the parish meeting, I am not aware of the nfti re of the objections that were urged against the system, and I must confess that I have never read or heard any such arguments which seemed to be entitled to serious con- sideration. It has always been my impression that it would be attended with the most beneficial results for the Bishop, Clergy, and Laity to 97 meet lofi««t}icr for friendly consultation on affair* relative to tlie oo nmon interests of the Cliureh, and to adopt sueh rej^ulations as nurht \>e. Mffreed upon with the deliberate and unanimous concurrence of those three orders ; hy which it might be expected that perfect unity and har- mony would be fully secured ; still, however, if I am mist^ikej in this impression, T trust I am open to candid conviction, and if thos* meetings fail of producing these results, — if through the influence of human passions and party fe * « t After the foregoing letters from the Curates-were re id, the following resolution was moved by Mr. Ritchie and seconded b^ Mr. Lynch, and passed by a majority of 17 — for, 43 ; against, 26 : — - On hearing the letters of the Rev. Mr. Bullock, and the Rev. Mr. Maturin, in which they intimate to the parish that they will attend the Synod, or Diocesan Meeting of Nova Scotia, and that they will feel themselves authorized to carry out the canons and regulations of that body within this parish, notwithstanding that the parish has thrice re- solved that they would not recognize that assembly, or send delegates, ji •/ V which yoa could in any case be affected cither for {rood or evil, and whrn any such decrees exist it will be time enough to ask your Clergy what they intend to do, and if they were to attempt to introduoe anythinjr ob- jectionnble, you know that a meeting could at any time be called to op- pose them with as much effect as at Easter last ; And then vou would have l>een tree from the charge of unfairly calling upon men to declare what they intend to do m the event of a certain contingency, and of punishing them for such intentions, although the contingency may never occur. Moreover, as I have explained above, it has never been intended to ^mpt to enforce the decrees of the Asgeinhly as snrh in unrepresented Parishes, and any misunderstanding caused by the replies of the Clergy- men, is to be attributed to their wish to give an immediate and explicit reply to questions which they could not have been blamed for refusing to answer at all. They might very properly have said ; Judge us by our deeds, we shall endekvour to foUow the dictates of our consciences, and •re prepared to answer for what we do. They, however, thou«rht fit to answer your questions more directly, and in the only way possible ac- eordmg to their judgment, considering their peculiar circumstance?.. 1 hey are bound by a solemn oath to obey their Bishop " in all things lata- fxd and honest, and therefore, as honorable men* must act according to ht$ wjunctums, provided they are not in themselves unlauful Now if the Bishop instead of acting without consulting any one, has taken the adrioe of the Assembly before issuing any. order, it cannot be held that the Clergy are thereby released from their obligations. They cannot say : " we should, according to our oaths, have obeyed your directions if your propositions had not been discussed there, but since the majority of the Clergy and Laity assembled together have declared that they affree with you, we hold ourselves at liberty to refuse obedience." Such a plea would not be justified by any one. Whether any particular regulation should he enforced in the unreme- sented panshes, is a matter for the consideration of the Bishop, who must dende according to hs own judgment, and will have the same power to •nforce it as he would have supposing the Assembly did not exist, and no more. But when ne does adopt and issue as his own, any such ordi- nance, not hewg%n Itself unlawful, the Clergy cannot, without tU quilt t>f perjury, refuse obedience. This might have been more clearly expressed m their replies, but they appear to have been anxious to leave no room fer supposmg that they wished at all to evade the respon«ihility of actine conacientionsly, and therefore repHed that they did intend to introduce iheregiLiUtionsofthe Synod, on the supposition that they would be en- jotned by thetr diocesan, without fully explaining to you that if not so •njotned they would notfeM bound to carry them out. Some of you may think that the Clergy ought not to be bound by anr rach oath, but this is not an open question. It is one of the rules of our 101 Charch, which neither you nor I can alter, and is indeed involred in the nature of Episcopal Government. Every ClerKyman is required to renew this oath, whenever he is admitted to a new charge, whether as Kector or Curate, and I am «ure that you would not respect the man, or desire to have him for your pastor (if you should unhappily find such an one in Holy Orders), who would take this oath with a mental reserva- tion, or who havinj,' formerly taken, would uow violate it either in the letter or in the spirit. Indeed I am disposed to believe that many of you were not aware of these obligations of the Clergy, when you voted aa you did, and that you would not on any account have combined to t«mpt them U) forswear thennmlveB, if you had been better in/onned. You will observe that I have not, in this letter, advanced any argu- ments in favour of our assen^bly, or endeavoured to refute any of the objections of its opponents ; because I do not desire to urge any who are at present unwilling to adopt it, being persuaded that soon you will bt more in favour of it than you now are against it, and that if I or any of my successors shall hereafter propose to annul what has been done, uid to act entirely according to Our own judgments, without reference to any Council or Assembly, you will not be slow to chaige us with aiming at despotic irresponsible power, and will be urgent in your demands for the restoration of the AssemUy. But there is one part of the constitution, on which I must say a few words, because it has been much misrepre- sented. You have heard of what is culled the Bishop's veto, but I hare good reason for believing that some of those who have been most vehem- ent in their opposition, have not yet made themselves acquainted with the constitution and regulations,— ra copy of which can be obtained for a trifle at the publisher's. Now, it is not the part of reasonable men to condemn without examiiJation, and I therefore ask you each to read carefully the document now mentioned. You will find that the word •' veto" does not occur once, and that no power is given to the Bishop to do anything whatever, so that you have been raided if you have been told that any extraordinary power is conferred upon him by that constitution. The fact is that the assembly being composed of three parties — the Bishop, the Clergy, and the Laity — the assent of each is required for tlte euactment of any regulation, so that if the Bishop and Clergy were unanimous in any case, and there was a majority of one amongst the Laitjt, against their resolution, it would fall to the ground. Therefore^ if the word must be used, the Laiiy have a " veto" upon the acts of the Bishop and Clergy, and the Clergy upon those of the Bishop arid the Laity. This is an important safeguard against the hasty adoption of measures requiring caution and deliberatioj^ but it interferes with* no existing riglits, except those of the Bishop, who may thus be checked in his plans, but cannot possibly be assisted by it. In short, the only effect of the veto is to stop any proposed change, and to allow things to remain a 'M VA •J 1 '^.it:. I'* y \V \' I I* * 102 a» they arc, and therefore it sliould he prized by those who are afraid of chanjrcs and aherations. I have heard that «ome few hare assisfned, a« a reason for their votes, a jealousy of the Bishop, and an expectation that his influcnee or authority would be in some measure diminished hv the action of the parish meetinir. I can scarcely suppose this possible, for surely yon would not make two unoffending men your victims, in order that you mijjht strike some one else over whom they have no control. Then the course adopted is inexplicable, if such were your intention, since the Bishop couhl not be in any way affected bv your vote a^jainst yonr ministers. And further, I cannot understand 'how, n^ ChvPchmen, you could deairo to free yourselves and ministers from the Bihop's control. One of the distinguishing features of the Church to which you lielono- is Kpiscopacy, or the aovemment by Bishops. This has b^.-n maintained from the time of tlie Apostles, and is based upon an immovable founda- tion. That it is the true Scriptural system is jrranted l)v yon when you profess yourselves members of the Church of En^rland, 'for if ymi verf convinced after f nil and honest investigation, that the Chnr'rh 'nf which you are members is not a true branch of Christ's Chvrrh. y„n vonld of course leave it, and join in communion with those whose claims were deemed indisputable. But it is most inconsistent to interfere with the order of the CJhurch, with which you are voluntarily connected. If you continue in communion with the Bishop, you acknowleds^e his ar.thority, implied m the name of overseer, and in his appointment to " irafch for your sods as otie who must give account," since without authority he could not incur responsibility. The notion of an Episcopal Church, in- dependent of the Bishop, involves a contradiction in terms. Doubtless there is in our nature a principle* of self will, inclining us to resistance to all authority, but this is not sanctioned by Scripture, "and It 18 generally found that those who cast off le.iritimate authority, are compelled to submit to some other power, or influences, not the less arbitrary and coercive because not formally recognized. I have but one object before me, which is the edification of that i)ortion of the Church, for which I have to give account hereafter, and I desire vour coopera- tion. I wish to labor for your benefit, and tnfh you, as wdl as /or you. I have nothing to gain for myself, but wish to devote myself to the ser- vice of the people of this diocese. • If you will not allow me tn do you good, if instead of working with me you regard every proposition with suspicion, and are always supposing some sinister "design, instead of charitably believing that the intention was good, even when any act does not commend itself t^ you, I must doubtless be impeded in my work ; and my labors for the extension of Christ's Kinirdom and /or the advancement of the truth must be to some extent hindered. And whilst I gneve over this on your account, they alone who cause the hindrances 103. m>j!»t b»'nr the rospoiislbility. I do not Iicre rufcr fo the opposition to the (licx'psnn nsMomltlv, about wlii<'h opinions differ, but to coses in which the ends sought to be attained could not be in themselves condemned by imy one. With reference to the late proceeding's, I must express my rc^et that no comnumicntioii was held with the CIcrgj', no notice given to them, tkat these resolutions were to be proposed, lor it appears to me that if your object had been simply to protect yourselves from a supposed danger, vou would have consulted with them, and endeavoured to dis- cover some method by which your wishes mii^ht have been obtained, without injnrin!* them or causiuj^ contusion in the Church ; and I cannot but fear that many acted without due consideration of the nature of the mutual relations of pastors and their flocks. If moreover you had com- municated with me, and obtained from myself an explanation of my views, as to the position of the Synod and the relation of yourselves and Clerjry to it, you would have learntMl, what I have stated above, that you were not at all exposed to the dangors apprehended hy you, and all tne mischievous consequences of the late fnhe step might have been avoided. I have so often expressed my readiness to afford information about any of my official acts, to any member of our Church applying to me, and my wish that any who are dissatisfied would personally ask for explana- tions, that I cannot be chargeable with the consequences of any mi.?un- derstanding. It is my wish to have friendly intercourse with every member of my flock, of whatever rank or station, and although, with the affairs of the whole diocese requiring my attention, I cannot visit from house to house like the Parochial Clergy, I am always most happy to see any who will come to confer with me, and if, instead of putting faith in reports and rumours and* acting on imperfect information, you would favour me with a personal interview when dissatisfied, I believe that a much better feeling would prevail amongst us, and that all the good works in which you and I ought to be equally interested would be much more efficiently conducted. And now I must entreat those Avho really regard the interests of religion and of our Church, to consider what is to be the end of the present state of things ? Can 'the Clergy continue their labors beneficially whilst this resolution is on record? And if they leave you are you pre- parrd to close your rhurches, or do yoii suppose that any Clergyman of standing and character, such as you would desire in your ministers, will come with the risk of being at any time removed when a majority of votes can be procured against him ? Tiie minister of Christ is chai'ged to be '* instant in season and out of season, to reprove, rebuke, exhort," whilst he is warned that atler a time '' the people will not endure sound doctrine," but by this coercion you would tempt him to neglect his duty, and to listen to those who say "prophesy not unto ua right things, "'I I" 1 '^1 vf p. I^i I./ 1%.' .104 speak unto V6 smooth thiny^, prophest, deceit,.'- Tiie truest wisdom If J-ou --h to .ecure faithful'and efficient teacher, and gu d"s " * o .frc«,Ac«,^,,,7.aW.s and make them a« much a« pos^ible^^; J^^^^^^^^ that " they may speak boldly, as they ought to speak." ^ ment ofTh^own I'^'T ""'^^ '""^'"^ "^'*^'"'«' ^^>'*^"^ '^^^ accomplish- ment ot their own objects, andcar^ not what mischief mav be caLed provided only they succeed ; but I will not believe that many can emet S ^f i "'' '" ''"P^r^'J" '^^ ^^^■«*'"= differences, and thi yol. wo^ild re o,ce if harmony could be restored, and the evil consequences of he kte division m any way remedied. It is never easy to retmce our steps and It IS not for me to suggest what en should now be adopted, btt'^ f after reading this letter you feel that you acted wl:], too much predp ta doll "i 7"' ? ""«W«/-»-'«« of our vie^vs and intmtious, ^yuXtll doubtless desire to come to an amicable understanding- with the minister" ofthc parish, and I am sure that if this is sincerely desired the ewS be no insuperable difficulty in the way. ceJt'/^n!'^ '^"'''}'^ ^" ^° ''^^'™P'' ^" '^'^ """Ss ^« the rest of the dio- cese but you cannot occupy your proper position, whilst these divisions and dissensions prevail. On many subjects there ^iU always be diversirv of opmion, but you may very well agree to differ. Why shea d 2 party attempt to coerce, or interfere wllh the liberty of tL othe ? I ^^CVuTn ^' ^""'^T' ? r^""'"'^ "^^"^^^« ^^^^- b«dy o( Christ; Let all bitterness and wrath be put away from you." At least do nr^ a low your differences to stop alfattempi to reCe the abrt l^Z House of God, who is dishonoured when His Temple is neglected The season is passing away, and the buildings under your chargeVthe church oLra^felavlif rt. ' My constant pr^vor is according to the CoUm for this week, in which I trust that you he-artily join, that pur God will grant to us by His Holy Spirit, to hkve a ri^hr^l men m all things May we be so guided that we may liold thela th in iuTty of spirit, in the bond of peace, and in righteousness of life. ^ Believe me to be, in the bonds of Christian love, Your affectionate friend and pastor, To the majority at the Easter meeting of Parishioners of St. Paiira. H. Nova Scotia. . S^' ?— The most striking passages in the .-^ihavr^ Iptt...- }.o,-» k..>.. liahcizeu by the compiler.] ANONYMOUS AND COTEMPORARY OPINIONS. 4 •H * {^From Corrrspoiidencc of the " Svn."'\ The following letter is copied from the "Sun" paper of the 14tli August, 1863 ; it was accompanied by a condensed report of the Judg- jneut of the Privy Council in the case of the Rev. Mr. Long vs. the Bishop of Cape Town : — Mb. Editor, — You will oblige by publishing the accompanying deci- sion of the Judical Committee of the Privy Council, in the #ase of the Uev. Mr. Long rs. the Bishop of Cape Town. What will the advocates of Bishop Binney's Synod Bill think of them- selves when they read the unanimous decision of the highest Court in the Kmpire upon this Synod case. The men that voted for that Bill in the Legislature ought to hide their heads in very shame ; many of them gave the lie to every act of their political lives. It was a degrading picture to see men calling them- selves Liberals voting down liberty of conscience, and as far as they were able placing a power in the hands of one man that the Queen dare not ask for. By their votes they gave power to one man to erect a Court oftttside of and independent of the Courts of the country, — and, as in the case of the Bishop of Cape Town, gave him power to appoint his tools to try, condemn and punish any Clergyman that dared to think for him- self. The Bishop of Cape Town, and all other advocates of the one- man-power Synods, have now been told in unmistakable language that there can be no law superior to and above the law of the land. Notwithstanding the jealous and unwarrantable c'olnplaints of the Puseyite faction throughout the Province, about the influence and preten- sions of the Churchmen of the city, Churchmen througliout the Province owe them a deep debt of gratitude for the noble and determined stand they made in resisting successfully Bishop Binney's Synod Bill. And above all, and over all. Churchmen generally owe a debt of gratityde to John W. Ritchie for his noble defence of their religious ''her ies, that cannot be easily paid. Such a Bill as Bishop Binney's in the hands of an unscrupulous man, would shatter the Churcli in this Province into fragments in a year. All parties in the Church ought to be sincerely thankful that they escaped so dir^ a calamity. This decision, I think, may bo considered a death-blow to Synods, at least of the one-man-power. The remarks of the conductors of the Church Eecord on this decision arc unworthy of notice. 'tl » *< il 1.; I - w Aug. 12, 1863. A Chuuchman, \ ^ I« 106 (J* •»..■ M t'J^i ^^ [F/OOT the " 5u?i" o/ 20l'fc August, ISGS.] ]Mr Editor :— I only learned yesterday that the EejxtHer of Saturday last coiitaiiiod a <'ommunication, signed " Another Chui-ehman," in reply to my iiitroductcry remarks to the decision of the Judical committee of the' Privy Coiim-il. that appeared in the Sun of the 14th, To persons fully conversant with the controversy of last winter, the remarks of " Another Churclunan" carry their refutation on the face of them. For the information of persons not fully conversant with the discussions on the Synod Bill last winter, it will he as well to examine some of the rt-marks of the writer in question, and allow all interested to judf»e of the reliance that ouprht to be placed on them, and also whether he has imp»oved the position of the advocates of Synods. " Anofher Churchman" says their Lordships (the Judical committee) have only decided that Synods not legally constituted are only voluntary associations, and therefore only binding on such as choose to submit to the rules of such assemlJies. In this he is quite correct and even here tliat fact was fully imderstood (hence the anxiety for legal enactment). Bishops however, of the Cape Town stamp have entertained the opinion that, m accordance with the oath of obedience that Clergymen of the Church take, they are bound to obey the Bishop in all things not morally wrong ; now they have been told by the highest Court in the Empire that they are only hound to obey them when they are legally right. Upon ll»is point hangs the whole pith and power of Synods, and if "Another Chnrchman" had been wise he would not have raised it. If the Bishop of Cape Town without legal sanction treated Mr. Long as he (lid for exercising his judgment in a case in which it has been proved 1„. was right, what chance, I would ask this champion of Synods, would ]Mr. Long, or any other person, have with this Cape Town Bishop if lie lijul the sanction of law to enforce his peculiar views and Pusovife notions upon the members of his Church ? Tins is the point Churchmen have contended for, to prevent such men as the liidiop of Cape Town from obtaining the sanction of hnv, to force the members of the Church to bow~to such rules or regulations as tlui Syno.i might choose to enact and enforce upon Churchmen. Bishop Jiiuney may form Synods as often as he likes and when he pleases, so long as they are like the Synods or assemhli-s of other Churclu>s— voluntary : but the moment he asks for the sanction of law to enable him to form such rules and regulations as he thinks proper, to bmd the conxc.iences of Churchmen, he ought to receive the determined opposition of every Churchman with a particle of freedom in his soul. The Bishop of Cape Town's treatment of Mr. Lon? proves what such men will do, and to what lengths they will go, to (;arry out their peculiar opiaiuuo iiiid viC'vvs. li' such men cannot govern their flocks with 'T-f^.- 107 Christian lovo, forhearanee and charity, they are unfit to govern them at all. — They ouglit to know in those days of religious liberty, freemen will not have tlioir consciences shackled. The writer goes on to say that the Bishop of Nova Scotia never pretended to onerco any of his clergy in this matter. Now, why did not this champion of Synods and peace add that he did not coerce any of his clergy in this matter, for the simple reason, he had not the power to coerce any of them that were unwilling to attend. I am of opinion, however, that " Anotlicr Churchman," will not attempt to deny that had he been granted the power he would not have failed to make use of it. The exhibition in .the Council Chamber and elsewhere has settled that question. The v'ritor considers it very irritating to call an assembly of clergy and laity, composed of the most respectable men, " A one man Synod." A spade is a spade, call it Avhat you please ; and when an assembly of clergymen and laymen, be they ever so respectable gives the power to one man, without check of any kind, to ignore and set at nought all their deliberations and resolutions, it is neither more nor less than a one mau Synod or assembly, and made so by the members themselves. " Another Churchman" regrets that the calm that has succeeded the Ecclesiastical storm of last winter should be disturbed. There is one fact beyond dispute, and that is, there is but little credit due to the advo- cates of Synods for the calm. — Calms, however, often precede storms, and Churchmen will do well to be on the watch, for although the serpent has been well scotched, he is not dead. August 20. A Churchman. [From thp St. John " Church WUnesfs," of March 18, 1863.] "We liavc rpcoivod a copy of a Bill which has been introduced into tlio Nova Scotia Legislature to legalize a Synod of the United Church of England and Ireland in that Province. It is substantially a copy of the Act which passed the Canadian Parliament in 1857, on the same subject, with one important exception. In the Canadian Act it is provided, " that nothing in this Act contained shall authorize the imposition of j»ny rate or tux upon any person or persons whomsoever, whether be- longing to the said Church or not, or the infliction of any punishment, fine, or penaltv upon any person, other than his suspension or removal from office in tlio said C'hurch, or exclusion from the meetings or pro- ceedings of the niocosan or general Synods." Why this important pro- •ri^r. la /\Yy,ifff^fi \-fy i}\o. Novfi SfTitiA bill wp CH!mot iinairine. It aPDeftr? to us to be a very wise provision. But onr objection to the Bill rests H m * V: "i^^M ,/ i^ 108 upon a broad.ir ground than this. Wc hold thut Syno.ls arc not only unnecessary, l>ut, in tlift present situation of the majority of the ClcrcV ID these Colonics, positively injurious to the Cliurch. That they are unnecessary is proved by the experience of the Church in England. Church hfe there was never more vigorous than it is now, hut there are no Diocesan Synods. It is true that there arc Convocations of the two l-rovinces of Canterbury and York, but they liave not ))een guilty of doing any real work of late years. They are simply arenas for talk, and do not intluonce the operations of the Church cither at home or abroad. That Synods may injure the Church is proved l.y tlie action of the Ontario Synod vesting the patronage of the rectories in the hanils of an irresponsible Bishop, and By the action of all the (\iii,.diau Synods on the veto question. The Canadian Bi^iops are now virl.iallv supreme in their dioceses, m conse(pience of the veto power Which they' possess, and ttie want of indopondencc among the majority of the Cfer-v. In the J-T^^ni '^"'"""^''' *'*'' ^'''''"P ^**' °'^^'''" ^^'^'^ opp)sed l.y the majority ot his Clergy; he lias burked salutary measures whi<;li have been intro- duced into the Synod by the mere expression of his opiui.)n against them and for ten years has carried all his own without difliculty. The Kev. K. Lewis, ,n a speech delivered by him at the last meeting of the Untano Synod, after stating the evil effects of this want of independence, cites two instances " which go to prove that the Clergy of the Church of l^ngland c-an be independent enough when the fear of the Bishop is taken away But if this " fear of the Bishop" operates to such an extent in Canada, can we hope to be free from it in these Lo«.r Provinces? Ihat our brother Churchmen in Nova Scotia are not insensible of the danger of passing the l)ill in question, wiU be seen by our correspond- ents lettcir in to-day's issue, and by the petition addressed to the House of Assembly by the Rector, Church Wardens and Vestry of th». parish of St. George, m the city of Halifax, on behalf of themseUes and the con- gregations whom they represent. [For the Church WltnesB.J Mb. Editor,— a Bill for the Incorporation of the Church Synod in this diocese is before the Legislature. It asks the power of apiiointment, deprivation or removal of any person bearing office in the Church, of whatever order or degree, any riy,<« o/ J' . ^ 4r| ■M ♦I .;t * w no ing Injury bein;^ inflicted upon the other parts. In this respect the case of these dissentients is distinguishable from every one of the cases in the Statute book, to which his Lordship referred, and l.eroia hes the fallacy which, m the fervour of his zeal, he failed to perceive. What are the circumstances of those cases ? They may be dis(in-ii^'' I:?"^*^"''"''*- "^'^'^ "*^^y misrepresentations of the nature of the Synod Bill, which have been circulated, and the private infltiences brought to bear upon meml)er8of the Ugislature by its opponents in Halifax, it has been- deemed expedient to prepare a brief statement of facts, for the information of those who desire to discover the truth. No greater powers are sought by this Bill than are granted readily by the Legislature every Session. It is the common case of an application by a laree body of prsons for an Act of Incorporation, with power to manage their own aifairs, and a special proviso that th»f shall not interfere with any other person or persons. On opening the book of local Acts, at almost any page similar powers are found to have been granted to Associations and Companies of all kinds, and sometimes even including power to interfere with the right** of others as for example to mining, and telegraph companies. Referrinl to tne nrst Acts in the volume : * ^ The Governors of King's College, tho Alumni, the Governors of Dalhousie the Trustees of Acadia and St. Mary's Colleges have power to establish such bye-laws, rules, and ordinances, as may be thought necessary for the further- ance of the objects for which they are incorporated, and to apiwint, suspend •and remove all officetB required. This and nothing more is now sought bv the Church of England. a j Moreover other religious denominations have obtained, without difficaltv such Acts as they required. In the Wesleyan Methodist Act the "rules and usages" of that Society are folly recognized in the preamble, and generallv by Revised Statutes, Cap 61, (with the addition of Cap. 28 of 1860 )lnv congregations, holding that each congregation is a Church in itself mav in- coreorate themselves and adopt a "permanent Constitution and B'ye-Laws" and appoint officers. Now the Chureh of England in this Province asks for no greater powers than these, except that, as it is composed of many congre- gations, her lay members must be permitted to act by their representatives There is no foundation whatever for the statements respecting Ecclesias- tical Courts sanctioned by law, contained in the Petition from St George's There is not a word in the proposed Bill, to authorize the establishment of a Court, which implies a Judge recognized by Statute, and with power to com- pel the attendance of witnesses at hie discretion. No power will be conferred beyond that which is already exertjised by every religious denomination over Its own members, and which the Civil Courts invariably uphold Many such «i.ses have been decided in England, in the Colonies, and in the United States, upon ai^j^als rroiu Miuist«rs or others against the governing bodies of 113 their several dcnominatloue ; and at this moment the ordinances of the Synod uiay be enforced, '"by the strong arm of the law," against all its members, as much as if the propoecd Bill had passed. And aint* by the additional Clause nil who have not, themselves or by their representatives, taken part in it, are exempted from its control, no party whatever can be injured by the Act. It has been pretended, that this application Is not really made by any very hirge majority of members of the Church of England, in this Province, or that u has not been suflBciently considered. The facts are a? follows: Diocesan Svnods, which had long fallen into disuse in England, the Parliament having gradually aHsuraed to its^elf all legislation for the Church, are part of the Epis- ••opal system ; and by the Canon Law as reformed by Cranmer and other •Njmmiseioners, (of which the adoption in England was "only prevented by the untimely death of Edward VI.) all Bishops were required to hold Synods annually. In the Colonics, as also in'thc United States, separation from the S>tate has rendered sach deliberative bodies essential, and they have been re- stored with the addition of the Laity who have now a voice equally with the Clergy. In the year 1854, a large majority of the Clergy, and of representatives of Parishes in this Diocese, determined to follow the example of other Colo- nies ; and accordingly the actual operation of a Synod has been tested by meetings for business in 1855, 1856. 1858, 1860, and 1802; most of thosi who were at first doubtful having now taken part in it. The application to the Legislature was discu8.«ed in 1860, and was deferred until the next Ses- sion, that there might le full time for a general expression of opinion. In ihe notices for the election of Delegates, at the Easter meetings of 1862'. the intended application was especially mentioned ; and the draft of the W\, to- gether with the resolution of the Synod which had been adopted almest unani- mously, was published in the Church paper in the beginning of November. Thus all possible publicity was given to it, and the application must be re- garded as emanating from the whole body of the Church of Eagland in Nova Scotia, with the following exceptions : — Of 55 Parishes or Miasions, two in the city and one outside of Halifax have positively opposed the Synod, and 3 others have refrained' from taking part in it by the election of representatives. Of 60 Clergymen officiating under the Bishop's lieense only 2outof Hali- tAX. and 3 in it, have declined taking part in the proceedings of the Synod. This minority is so small that it ought not, in any case, to be alk>wed to deprive the majority of the object sought, and even if it were much larger, it -nnild have no right to interfere, since it will act be affected by the AxA, if it wishes not to be included. If absolute unanimity were to be required, oo the part of all persons whose interests may be affected by any measure, legislation would be impossible. The incorporation, of Hali&x, for instance, could nerer lisjve been obtained usder ^!ose fu^RtiittRss The applicants cannot believe that the Legislature of Nov» Scotia will- 8 * 4 i i I- 1 114 ^f"'"- I''' titat thoin witli loss conVi«leratIon than vrnn manifested towards their bretlirrn by the Legislature of Ciinada, which has three times recognized their claim-* : 1 St— by an address of butli Houses to the Crown, in 1855, supporting the application of the Bishops, Clergy and I^aity, for an Imperial Statute to relieve them from their disabilities, ormippsed disabilities; 2nd — by passing an Act in 1S5G, on the recommendation of the then Colonial Secretary, and as it is Itelieved without a division; 3rd — by another Act in 1858, to supply some deticiencies in the former. These applied to the whole of Canada ; and addi- tional Acts of Incorporation have since been jiassed, for the Synods of the .several Dioceses included in that Province, The question has been asked, Why do you require an Act of Parliament, when it is admitted that such Act will not give any additional force to the laws • •f the Synod, since those who will be stbjected to them are also subject to rijem at present ? To this question several answers maybe given, but it is suflScient to mention one or two of them. The Church 'of England has liecn subjected to restrictions, as an establishment, from which other Christian com- munities have been free, and it is uncertain how far these restrictions apply to the <^olonial Branches. An Act is required to remove this uncertainty, that, being deprived of the advantages, we may no longer be encumbered by the restrictions, proper to that status. The Imperial Parliament would have given the required relief, to all the Colonial Dioceses, in the year 1854, when a Bill, which had pa.«sed the Lords, was read a second time in the House of Commons by the very large majority of 196 to 62 ; but the Bill was with- drawn out of respect to the Colonial Legislatures, and in the belief that they would readily grant the desired powers. This was explained in his despatch to Canada, by Mr. Labouchere, who also confimitd the opinion, that legis- lation i.s required to place the Church of England on an equality with other Denominations, who hold their Synods, Conferences, and Conventions, at their pleasure. He says, " I cannot too distinctly disclaim, on the part of Her Maiesty'B riovemment, any intention or desire of placing the Church of England in a privileged or exclusive position in Canada ; but they are most anxious to moet the wishes expressed, and to free it« members from all unnecessary imjiedi- ments, to their own voluntary organization ; and thus to put than on an equal, footing with other Denominations of Christians.'' The same reason for special legislation is expressed in the preamble of the above-mentioned Bill nf the Imperial Parliament. . The practical evils of the existence of these doubts are frequently manifest- ed, uid some persons in this Province are thereby deterred from union with the Synod. In Capetown, where the Synod is held without any Act, a Clergyman affirming his belief that such Synods are illegal, in consequence of English Statutes, refused to give certain notices, and has been suspended and deprived of all his emoluments by the Bishop, wbo!°e prooeedings wdre confirm- «d by the Supreme Court He has appealed to tiie Privy Council, and hi? ll'> !o-5es willlje very great, whatever muy he ilifi ro«ult. Persons in hU siiua. tiori ouj;ht to liave tboir difricuities it-uioved through the assent ot the Crrwn i«j ati Act »)f the Legislature. Further, it has lately Iwjen docidecl. by tlio Supreine Courts of Sydney ai:oiiul)le request the Bishop, prefer- ring constitutional gf)verumont to dosptism. has acceded. The Laity »lw) have proved their estimation of the reiirescntative Institutions conceded l, the Bishop, by the election of Delegates in nearly 50 out of 55 Parishes or Mission.^. But without an Act of Incorporation, both Clergy and Laity may lie deprive*! of their privileges by the next Bi.-^hop, who would not be 'bound by any proceedings of the present Synod. The objectiS(jciett/ and the Endowment C(«.- mittee, for the benefit of tlie (yliurcb in c'enc-ral. The proposed Bill is intended to give tbe iSynomf;h.fe,i, wonM !.nt ..) bound by Law by any or(l.nat.(;..s of that Body vl,i.-|, ,nav nut be fou,..! iu t,io geuj^ml Lan:s an,J nhscrv,n,ro, of tl.o (^luirch : nnd nu.y" at any time fr.e N'mself from its contrui, by mthdruHurj f.o.n it. as in tbe'c-a.^e of anv otbor rolvntary society. (> 01 >i " The .■vpi-licatiun must 1,.^ re^-ardo.! a> ♦manaTinu' fn.ni t!ie wivole bodv le Chun-h, &c. r.F^iARKS.— At the la-4 mo.-tin- ..f the S'ynu.l d,, aT.n ndmcnf not to apply /or a Law, wa.-^ put. when thnv y^tcl— (^ler-v. 1) f-.r. -JH a-ain^t • Luity 1 t-r. 1, agamst.— (Church U.-cora Xov. 12. isivj, ) ( ,f th^^'r,.* ('lor.rynior. citciatmg in the .liocesu. -ee tiaie.s ro.-<-'ni/,etl their Kkmarks.— The ens... of Can.-ula is not in point. ^Vhen the proceeds of f.'.o .sale of reserved ( huroh lands in tl-.at l>rovin..e. W(Te ap,x>rtioned. it wis decided that tho amount bolongin- to tiie Chureh of Eni,dand, .should bo -iye-i ov.^ to the Chureh Society of each dio.-ese : it was necessary in consemTonee tliat tliat body should l)e in orporated in order to tak.^ charo^e wf it Neither Newtoundland nor New Brunswick (whicli Jiayo no .Svu.nl')' nor Nova Seotl-i has .^ueh general (Midowinent Fund of the Diocese. 8. ■• Restrictions apply to Colonial Branches,*' io. IlKMAiUv.^-- — No restrictions are s]v.e!fied. and Clergv.nen \yho haye h.nv occulted in tlie l>iocese have not experienced any. ' "^ !). •' The Parishioners ,,f St. ( leor-e's have .stated that they have no dc.slre to preyent their bretlireii," &:c. Ukmarks.— They have no desiiv t.. interfeiv .^o ioi,.^. as it remained a >-<.Ui'.ilnry Asscmhhi, but protest a^^ainst its acts being made bindin C^n.wu. Tliere was no Slate Churcli; all deiiomiua- ii";i.-« ui Liu luaus sioou ou au equal iooung ; ihere weie no ecolpsiasti- i*-.. •# I'" A' Pi '•' J Mi 120 ral court, as .distinct from civil conrU.. Tf,. Supreme Court, und.r tf.. Charter of Justice, ..ranted in 1K;J2, had supJemo jurisdi uion in ' I causc.,-c.v,l, ..nmmal, and mixed-arining within the Colony, vvi h im-h d^cuon over all subject, of the Crown, Ind other pernonn within ti;!. Canfo To 1?/ '^ "^'; *"■"'''"" *'^" •^"'''"^' ">' ^^"loment of the hZ l TV^ '^ ^' T\-'' 'l^P'^'"l«"t^''«-- «'"» ^l>e MiQ.l of St. Helena, nto a B.shops see and d■o.x^.<^ appointing, the r .,. lent. Dr. Gray to be ordamed and consecrated Jii.hop of the .c. , d eom.nandin^' h^ ;^ n. W -\^r '^r^r^' ^» Cuaterbury to ordain au. consecrate him L- fi rm .n^t't i " P^'""' purported to eiupower the, IJi.hop to per- form all the functions appropriate to the olHee of a Bishop within th. diocese of Capetown, and especially to frive institution. to benefices -to Krant licenses to officiate to all rectors, curates, ministers, an <-'!'U'-^-l' of England; to ...It all rectors curates, munsters, and chaplains, and priests and dca- ons m holy orders, of the Tlnited Church of England ind Ireland, u d o cte them bdore hnn. or before the officers whom he was authorise,! to appoint, and to inquire concerning their morals, as well .'s their beha- viour in their several stations and offices. Power was given to k- ( haZllo^'r 'r""' ^^"•'^^^'"r'^l ^ Viear-Cleneral, Oilicial Principal, Lliancellor ^.ommissaries. and other officers : and it was p.-ovided that an appeal should be made from sentences of the subordinate officers ,,! be appointed, to the Bishop, and from sentences of the Bishop to th. Archbishop of Canterbury. No ecclesiastical court was expressly con- st tuted by these letters patent, nor was power given to the Bishop , establish one : and it was declared they should not extend to repeal vary, or alter the prov.sum. of any charter whereby e.vlesiastical iuris- t "Id di';:;::: ^""" "" ""^ '"^"^ ^^ jwnsdiction within ti. nj. ,a ■nbi'?fV'H'" ^f '"^^ r'"'"'"' '^l"l '''' ^^'-^'"'1^ "*■ Capetown should be Mib^ct to the metropolitan see r.f Canterbury, in the s,nne manner ,^ ;, Bishop o any see within the province of Canterburv. and should takJ a-, oath of due obedience to him as Metropolitan ; aud November, 1853, resigned his Bishop- rie into the hands of the Archbishop of Canterbury, by whom the ra'^'if:- uation was accepted, and Dr. Gray ceased to be Bishop of Capetown. On the Hth of December, ]8.'>3, new letters patent were issued, by which certain specified parts of the oripjinal diocese of Capetown were erected into a distinct and separate Bishop's see and diocese, to be called thenceforth the Bisliopric of Capetown, and to this newlv constitut. <1 bishopric Dr. Gray was appointed, and ho was also appointed Metropoli- tan Bishop in tlie colony ot the Cape of Good Hope and its de])endencies. and^the island of St. Helena. The new letters patent seem to have beeii in other' respects in the same form with the old. But previously to tlie issuing of these letters, the Crown luid granted a constitution to the colony of the Cape. Keprosentafive instTtutions had been founded, and a Colonial Legislature established. Mr. Long was officiating in tlie colony as a minister of the ChurcFj of England, before any Bishop was appointed there. He Jiad been ad- mitted into deacon's orders for the colonies, by the Bishop of Loudon, in 1844. In the year 1845 he Avent to Capetown, and was appointed bv the tlien Governor of the cojony to be minister of the English Episco- pal Church of CJraaif-Keinet, his salary being paid partly by the Gov- ernor, partly by the Society for the Propagation of the Gospel, and partlv by his congregation. There seems to have been no endowment of anv kind attached to this ch..rch. He had at this time no other authority for discharging the duties of a minister in that church than the holy orders which he had received from the Bishop of London, and the appointment of the Governor of the colonv. Soon after tlie arrival of the Bishop of Capetown in the colony. In 1848, and wliih' the first letters patent were in force, Mr. Lonij was <»!■- dtined Priest by the Bishop according to the form and manner of ordain- ing Priests as contained in the Buok of Common Pr.ayer ; and, on bcin;: so ordained, lie took the usual oaths prescribed by the laws and usages in force in England, and amongst •)tliers the oath "of canonical obedienee to the Bishop. \)y wliicli he engaged to pny to him true and canonical obew, l»ray, in thy <:ol<)ny of Capetown, and to convoy tlie Cliurcli to the IJiMliop npoii certain t.-rnis a^M-eod upon between th.m". and hy a notarial act in the Dutch form, dated the 2d June. 1S:)4, Mr. Iloets transferred in full and free jtropcrty to the IJlwhop and liis sncc.-ssorM in jjcrpetuity. for ee-k-.-^iastieal pin-po.ses, a piece ot land therein boinu' ('. "'vd, '"-with tiie Church whi, Bishops of Capetown, all ordluar}- and i-.5>:scopai junsdutiuii, riglit.s and i)rIviloo;e.M. Ou the same day, his I. »ni>!iip preiu'lied in tlio purisli Chnn-h, and rcfiirrod to the appolluut as hc'vAir li(>nooforth the parish prit^.st. Then! w'(!re, or were supposed to bo, ?ome impeditni-nts to the institu- tio.i and induction of the now inounihent in the p:iin\M! to otnciato and have the cure of souls within the parisli and district 0} Mowbray. In this, as in his former license, the Bisliop reserved pov.er to revoke it, if he shouhl see just cause, and Mr. Lon;? on these oreasions renewed his oath of canonical ol)edience to the Bisliop. V* e will here observe, in order that we may not have occ^asion again t.) refer to tlic point, that we consider the good faith of the arrangements l)etw.'en Mr. Ho ts and the Bishop, to have required that tlie .nominee of Mr. lloets, when admitted by the Bishop to tliis church, should hold and r«'tain it on the same terms as a Clergyman in England regularly insti- tuted and inducte.l, and tluit the Bishop, by me.'nis of this license, ob- t;iiiH>d no right to suspend or deprive Mr. Long by the mere exercise of his discretion, or otherwise than for such cause as would have justified a sentence of suspension or deprivation in tlio case of a clerk in full and lawful possession of his benefice. Indeed, it is due to the Bishop to say that we did not understand his Lordship to contend for more than this by li's counsel at our bar. Li the year 18uG the Bishop was of opinion that, for tlie purpose of settling some scheme of Church government which should be binding uj)on the religious community of which he was the head, it would be desirable to convene a Synod, consisting partly of Clergy and i>artly of Laymen, members of the Church Avithiu liis diocese. The measure had been in contemplation, and. indeed, .under discussion, for several years before, and different -opinions had been entertained both by Clergymen and Laymen as to its legality and its expcdieiKy. On the I'jth of Xovember. LSaG, tin Bishop issued a paijtorul letter, i;i vvliich, after stating the reasons wiiich induced him to believe that siu'h a measure was exjKMlient. if not indeed necessary, for the well-being of the Church in the colony, and expl.-iiniug liic objects which might, in his oj)inion, be ellected by means of a Synod, liis Lordship 1 ro(!ceded to dcci.u-e of what person.s the Synod should be composed. These were to be, first, la;, delegates, to he elected in the ditfereni parishes by adults, being, or at the time of t)ie election, declaring them-elves to be members ot' the Church of England, and of no oiiier religi.-us denomination; s.vondIy, duly licensed Clergy, being in I'riest's orders. Deacons were i> be authorised to attend and speak, bnt not to vote. 8ome of ihe suojccts to be brought under tlic considoratiou of tho I. !•'. ■ I ^, ' «i' I jCV- 124 ionpi! urr° ''"'^•^'" P"'r^'0"°" were opposed to this measure. The nar^sh Bi,sh'^p'pS:2;lJ"'^,:!" '^'''T^/ *\-* -^ ^eliben^te together, the A Consisforial Court was appoitited for tlip trial nP oil ««• Ihe feynod had been convened without any express sanction of thp ^ c:^.- :^r ^"t :i'rj\:ti i;S? 125 waived that It would not be desirable to make any attempt for Uw parpo)=e Tit-r^i, "i\°^ rcHjlution to thia effect amongst tl.e printed pTpe™. In 1860 the Bishop convened a second Synod, to l« held on th7 17th of January 1861 ; and on the 1st of October, 1860. his Lordhhip addressed a letter to Mr. Long cnclos.ng a copy of a pastoral letter which he had i«»ued arsd also a copy of the printed regulations adopted by the Synod for th« elocl t.on of deputies. The pastoral letter referred to the acts and constitutions of the ast Synod, and mentioned as ono of the subjects to which his Lordship wouM have to call attention, the constitution of the eccleMastica) court Mr Long was of opinion that the convening of this Synod without the author, y e.ther of the 6rown or the local Legislature was an unlawful act on the part of the Bishop; that the Synod itself was iUegal, an!»5 n:*U....i I : "ig Ov!(ionc6 , inofv was mm ^-. *?5-:^^^ i;'» I «.o quostion of fact in i«m,e The Asso^Kor. aft.rw.nla delivered ' tl.rr m.mons ,n wnfng to the B.shop. .nrr. Leg fr.,.. ibo Jure of LouS and the cxerr,so of all m.m.ctcrial fau.Mons and offices for a period of tW-c months, and thcnecfomnnl until ho should have expn^s.od reg^t for hhiZ disobedience and h.. wdlingness to render nhedienci, tor the fCture ^ H,s Lonlsh.p a^dicnce and contempt, withdraw th^e license of the Rev. VVilliam Long and do deprive him of his charge and cure of soaU n the pan.sh or parochial district of Mowbray, and of all emoluments bek^ng mg to the same. And I do, moreover, hereby admonish the said William b In^S r "f TV^ ^ ^'^ ^^'""''^ '' P^'^'^^ «»«J warn him thaTTf he should do so after this his deprivation ho will render himself still furthe I liable to the censures of the Church. " Cathedral Vestry, March 6, 1861.*' R. Capbtown. Notice was g^vcn of the sentence on the same day to Mr. Lon^ and 'o tic Churchwardens of Mowbray who were required to inform to it T and a gen- leman of he name of Hughes w.as appinted by the Bishop to officiate mZ Church till a new mimster wa. appointed, and to receive Jne half of the In ?0!BC. 127 On tl)o rth of Mnn-li Mr. Long and the cburcltwardens applied to tU restrain the Lishep and Mr. flughes from interfering with him in the perfbrm^ ance of his Inwful dnties as ineun.hn.t of the parish of Mowbray, and from di.turf.mg h>m in rho enjoyment of hi« lawful emoluments as such incumbent ^omo fuithor prryeedinjrs took place in this matter, but the plaintiffs we.v re,iu.red to he a declaration in regular form, for the purpofe of frying the im^ p^trtant que«tupn.« in difference. ^ ^ The present suit Was accordingly instituted. It was a proceeding, of course, in the forms of the Roman Dutch law • a claim m conrention by the original plaintiff, and a defence and claim in recon- deSli nS '^'■^''"'^'*"*' -^ ^^'"^ "'" ^'-'"'^ ^"'^ P^'rtics were plaintiffi and both The claim of Mr Lnn^^, after stating those several matters of fact on which lie i-elied, in.isfod that h^ was aggrieved by the proceedings of the Bishop aiid praycMl the protection of the Court, and also a declaration of the law l!v the Lourt m conformity with his views on the several points in dispute: and .astly, that he ^^■9^ entitleiritual, so issued under the power and authority .-onveyed to hiin l^ the letters patent, or otherwise of right bclongibg to him as B,.s^>p of the Church of which the plaintiff was a Priest, and that the plaintiff was in consequence thereof, removed for lawful cause from the ( hurch ot xMowbray; and he maintained, in conclusion, that the Court was ' not entiHed to examine the sentence, but that if it were examined it ouirht to be amrtned. * This was his defence. In reconvention he prayed, by his second plea, tVmtjt might be adjiidged that the letters patent of the 25th of Scotember 184<, and of the 8th of December. 1853. are valid in k^ ami A„» *h^-. '•ontor the rights and powers claimed thereunder, and that occlasiaaticaf Wii diotion mity thereby be lawfully exercieod by him. « u • I . •*■• JN « F^' 128 By hm last plea he prajed that the ^lid plaintiff in convention and de- r. ndant .n reconvention mi^ht bo ru8traini.,l hy interdict, .0 long a« the M.»ntenco of deprivation should continue and remain in tone, from oSupyir or .Ucmptmg to occupy, the Churcii of fc?t. I'cter'H. Mowhn.y. or othK niterfer.ng with the duties of the minister of the naid Church. On the 15th of robruary, 18t]2, the Court gave ju.lgment against th. plaintiff .nconvont^n and for the plaintiff in reconventionrexcept as to hi! K'cond p ea ,n reconvention, to which we have already referred, and adiudeed .«aeh party to pay hin own costs. Thi.. was in effect a decision in all m^ateWa hTMaieiv'Vh^''" ""'^'J'- "'"1 ^^' ^^'"^ ^«-^ l'«- "^"■''^•^ '- «PP«« ^^ UIow. and though there was sonic difference of opinion amongnt the three .ludges who decided ,t. no one who ren.l« their opinion can fail U, admire the submitted t« them and the judicial temper and moderation which tliv have 8hown m a case calculated to produce great excitement in tlie colony. ' RUhi^ qi^estion which we have to consider is. what authority did the JJiahop poBses8 under and by virtue of his letters patent aft the time when be«e sentences were pronounced ? The Judges belL have In^en unanimou" T opinion-first that all jurisdiction gi^x-n to the Bishop by tbo hZl patent of 1847 ceased by the surrender of the Bishopric in 1853 and th" .H8ue of the new letters patent ; and, secondly, that the lette,^ patent of 1^3 fSnfTiw"'- ^ ««"^*'f"^^"^J government had been established in the tape of Good Hope, were meffeotual to ereat« any jurisdiction, ecclesiastical or civd withm he colony, even if it wore the intention of tJie letters pa ^nt'o create such jurisdiction, which they think doubtful. In these coddu^sions wo Dr. Gray had been duly .anpointed and consecrated a Bishop of the Ans, liean Church m 1847. and suci, he remained after the resignation of hi see^' but by such resignation ho surrendered all territorial jurisdiction and power of proceeding judicially •» mvttos. so far as such authority depended uCke r'^'Tvff "\'V.^^^-, '^'^"^•^ r''' ''''^- "«^ only l,een «ed^; h. ourt below but have been emlx^died in their Judgment, by which'thor have expressly rejected the set.,n4 claim above stated of the Lord Bishop ' But a majority of Judges below has held that the defect of coercive juris. diction under the letters patent has been supplied by the voluntar^ suim !^ the Bishop. This point we have next to consider. The Church of England, In places where there is no Church establtthed t^jUxw, IS in the tame situation with any other religious body, in no. better !nt*lT "'"■'' ^'"''""' "^'^ '^' T'"^'-'^ "^^y '^^opt, as the member of any other communion may adopt rule, for enforcing discipline withinThe^ SitTd to tSi "^"^ '" '^'" "^^ -P^a3ly%r by^nipliction Z" It may be further laid down that where any religious or other lawfiil «wo. ^v; 129 ' ci»Uoo bu not only agreed on the tema of its union, but has dao «nn«tf*„f.^ a tnbunal to detemine whether the rules of the J^Lh^^Z^^ the BbW, .uthoril i. Sy rfji" ""^P ", '«»P»^,!~«<«» » With taking th, «.thV<2„^" J^dSto ClJl^ »'°P"'»»."»«. 4 Mowbray, .ubject to «v„i.ta ftl taij o^^^?" "S'" "5; P^. »' mart to the livioK of Mowbn«r onS^^ J^^t ^ """f*"* "» •PP"'"'- language of Mr. Justice Watemever d 81 tKiJ" «• fk ^. '^® contact between the ph^intiff ^TifenLf 'wfl ^.t^^^^. .^^ oouiracted that the iaw8 of the Church of Endand sbairii,iirf."oS.t'.''2* as apphoable here, goyem both." ^"•g""" »«•, ttoougli ORly as far I I j£*'klllttmr"t '^" — - ^^T^" "* xLXs; l»<'* 130 Ii, then, Mr. Long Fhowt to have been guilty of any oflenoflu which hy lh»! Itiw of the Chtirefc of Kn([lMd would hare warranted hia nuspnsion »nd wb- •eqaebl depriTation V Tha depends mainly on the point whether Mr. liong WM jastitied in reiiisiBg to take the stepe w4iich the Bishop required him to take, in oafdet te procure the election of a delegate for the p«rish of IVTowbray to the Synod convened for the 17th of January, 1861. In what manner and by what acts did he contract this oblijntion ? ^hc letters patont may be laid out of the case, for if the Bishop's whole contention in reepcot of them be oonccded, they conferred on him no power of conrening a meeting of clergy and laity to be elected in a certain manner prescribed by him &r the purpose of making laws binding upon Churchmen. A very elaborate argument was entered into at our Bar, in order to show that Diocesan Synods mtjf be lawfully held in England without the license of the Crown, and that the Btatote witii respect to Provincial Synods docs not extend to the colonies. Il it not neeecsary to enter into the learning on this subject. Il is admit* ted that Diocesan Synods, whether lawful or not, unless with the license of the Crown, have not been in uce in England for above two centuries, and Mr. Long, in recognising the authority of the Bishop, cannot be held to have ac- knowledged a'rigV* on his jwrt to convene one, and to requnw his clergy to attend it. But it -» a niistfdie to treat the- assembly convened by the Bishop as a Synod at all. It was a meeting of certain persons, both clergy and laity, either selected by the Bishop, or to be elected by such persons and in siKlb manner as ho bad preseribed, and it wa» a meeting conrenod, not for the pur- pose of taking counsd and advisii^ tojwther what might be beat for the gene- ral good of the society, but for the purpote afagreeiriff upon certain nUet, and establishing in fact certain laics, by iohichkich there is nol^^Z Zt tr "^f '"'^ '^r\^' «' "*' ^*^P *y W is authorised to impose- and even .f the rneamng of the rubric referred 1> by the Bishop in hTcl; were such as bo contend* for-whioh we think that U in notiit wouW T^ '£i;t;.st.z •" ^''':' '--' ^- -^-^-^ ^™ ^^- ^^^^- r« are therefore of opinion that the order of suspension issued b» O'e Aa< the sfibserruent sentence of deprivation founded upon his disohedCekceto the order ofsHspenston mustfaU with it. '»v^ience to It was stronglj pressed, both before U8 and in the Court below, that rutv. posing he«e sentences to be erroneous. Mr. Long had no remedy agilnst them thTlS^ "rT^ '^t^' ^'l^'''''^'^ '' CanteLry. under th^ pt^lnsot the letters j«ten . What authority bis Grace might possess under tbe ktteS patent or otherwise, to entertain such an appeal if"t U been presented ut unnecessary, and we think it is inexpedient, to discuss. It is suffioierto car no such appeal has been pre^nted. and that the suit in which tbk appeal .8 brought respect, a temporal right, in which the appellant alleges tharhe has been mjured. It ca la for a decision as to th« riiht of property, and ^l l?i S^m'V""'" ^ ^"«/.of f-inds of which the Bishop is trustee. Wh-t ever else Mr^ Long may by h« conduct have done, we cnnnot hold that he Im precluded himself from exercising the power which under simibr oircum- stonces he would have possessed in England, of resorting io a oiril c^7f?r todctermme questions of an ecclesiastioal character essential to their decision Indeed, m this ca.^, the appellant and respondent have alfke found it neo-sl rhlhSMrb^r^y''"'""^"^ determine the right of possession of tbe U 3fn!J^"h *^?r? '^ ^^ H"^ '"'^^'^ ^"'« »PP««^«^ *« *''« Archbishop, he T^ not bound to do so ; that he was at liberty to resort to the Supre:ne Oourt ; and that the Judges of that court w^re jurtified in examining and "r^ deed, under the obligation of examining, the whole matter submitted to them We, of course, are m the «ime situation ; and after the most anxious consil deration we hav^ come to the conclusion that the sentence complained of can- not be supported and therefore we must humbly advise her Majesty to re- verse It, and to declare that Mr. Long has not been lawfully rei^oie^d frr^ he Church of Mowbray, but remains mini.t«r of such Ohnrch. and cntitloj to the emoluments belonging to it. ^■uu^.^a Being of this opinion, we are relieved from the necessity of comriderin.^ a« 51?L"i I'^T."""' "»^2'«fher^the course adopted by theRt. Rev. reason- ^t"li!"' 'jf F""""-^7."6^ -u-gair.aL r.ir. Long was in aii respects proper, "and whether the proceedings themselves, if tbe B.iAop be regarded as\cUng and entitled to act ^:th the authority of a Visitor sitting in foro domestico^^t I } '^i 132 r ^ • ft,' ',. ^ conducted with that attention to the rules of substantial justice and that strict unpartiality which are necesaaiy to le observed by all tribunals, however little tettered by forms. Much argument was addressed to us at the bar on this part of the cage, and it would not be proper to pass it altogether without notice • and nrst with respect to the suspension, and the constitution of the tribunal tor the tnal of Mr. Long, on the first charge against him. It cannot be held that all the provisions which would have been applicable to such a case under the Church Discipline ^ct in England were necessary to be poserved in the colony. This was impossible, but care should have been taken to secure, as far as possible, the impartiality and knowledge of a judi- cial tribunal. Here the Bishop was not merely in form but substantially the prosecutor, and a prosecutor whose feelings, from motives of public duty as well as from the heat necessarUy generated in the purest minds by a lono- and eager controversy, were deeply interested in the question. It was, perhaps, neces- aary that he should preside as the Judge before whom the cause was hoard and by whoni the sentence was pronounced ; but he should have piocured, as a Bishop in England under such circumstances would have done, the advice and assistance, as Assessors, of men of legal knowledge and habits, uncon- Bectod with the matter in dUpute, and have left it to them to frame the deci- sion which he would afterwards pronounce. But instead of adopting this course, he selected as a&sistants three gentlemen, all clergymen sharing hw own opinions on the subject of controversy, and aU themselves membera of that Synod, which Mr. Long was accused of treating as illegal. Mr. Long was citeil for refusbg to give the required notice, but the sen- tence was not grounded entirely on this charge. The protest which he had given in by his counsel against the proceedings was treated as a very grave offence. The Bishop, in speaking of it, says : — "To put in such a document is virtually to reject Episcopacy and the Church, and to stop on the very confines of schism, if not to have overstepped the line. ^^ Mr Long's conduct at a private meeting with the Bishop is discussed as to which there is great doubt what really took place, and no re^^ular evidence appears to have been produced, or was in fact admissible, for it was noi to the point in question; and from the language of the Bishop in delivering his Judgment, it may be inferred that the sfentence against Mr. Long was not founded entirely on the only charge which he had been summoned to meet The proceedings which led to the subsequent deprivation are open to no loss objection than those which resulted in the suspension. The Bishop had deckred before the firat Synod that there were no rules or proceedmgs for trying ecclesiastical offences, and that one of the objects of the Synod was to supply the deficiency. The Synod had established a Consis- tonal Court, and certain regulatio',.4 by which the trialt of clergymeti and of laymen before sttch Court should be guided. These regulations had amongst other thinz"' provided that n if\ $f>**f AP*^£: fi^ 133 deprivation .thoulfl be pronounced liy any person whatever, but only by the Bishop with the assistance of the Chancellor of the diocese, or in caae there be no such officer, some legal adviser whom he may see fit to appoint. The Bi- shop insisted that Mr. Lono v?as bound by the rules established by this Sy- nod, and must therefore, it should seem, have considered hitnself bound by thc^ ; and ♦'?', <^ithout any regard to these rules, without calling in the as- sistance of any legal adviser whatever, without any armhgy to the course of proceedings in England, by ivhich the judgment of impartial persons ac- quainted urith the law is secured, the Bishop pronounces sentence of depri- vation. ^ On this occasion, as on the former, the sentence seems to liave been foun- ded on.what are termed repeated acts of disobedience and contempt by Mr. Long, instead of on the single charge which he was called uijon by the cita- tioQ to meet. We cannot say, therefore, that the proceedings in this case have been con- ducted in a proper manner, though our judgment rests on the other grounds already stated. We have been much embarrassed by the question how we ought to deal with the costs in tlii.s ease. We do not doubt that the Bishop has acted la the conscientious discharge of what he considered to bo his public duty, and he has succeeded, a.t great personal trouble and expense, in bringing this con- tention in the court below to a favourable issue. On the other hand, it is im- possible not to feel that Mr. Long has been subjected lo probably not less trouble and expense -by a course of proceeding on the part of the IJishop which we have been obliged to pronounce not warranted in law. Feeling the hardship of the case upon the Rt. Rev. respondent, we stii) think that we are bound to award the costs of the suit and of the appea' the appellant. We cannot, of coarse, suggest to her Majesty any considt tion of what it may be fit to do, at the expense of the public ; but it is not be- yond our province to observe that the Lord Bishop has been involved in ibe difficulties by which he has been embarrassed in a great measure by the douKfr. ful state of the law and by the circumstance that he, not without some reason, considered the letters patent under whi.h he acted to confer on him an autho- rity whioli, at the time when he acted under them, her Majesty had no autho- rity to grant, and that either iu this or in uome other suit it was important to the interests of the colony generally, and especially of the members of the Church of England within it, that the many questions which have arisen in this f'ase should, as far as possible, be set at rest. [N. B. — The italics in the above judgment are the compilers.] ]'•'* y > « VM I v4 ..V I THE BISHOP OF OXFORD AND THE LITANY. To Ihe Editor of the Record. , b« submitted"? cLnll a c";; „?'^°, Ph""","^™.'' •' '"'■.'"^"'<' » «»«' "> forward to you. f^^ ' "'""''' *'"' ""'"^ "P"""". I ^g to In the present dIscredifHble state of the Eeelesiaslicol P™,rt. ;. • «>rlt:=tTo'™L\°„^r7o;^ffts r?'^^^^^^^ jorU, „, eases the Cerg, are t^pt°t;al'r„^!'2 ' 7'ZS:r^ I am, Sir, your obedient servant, S9, Upper Grosvenor-street, ^^''^'' Seymour. London, August 18, 1862. CASE FOK TH. aOINX OPINZON OF MR. A. ,. STEPHENS, L. .. D. Q. C, AKO MR. KICHAnn JEBB. " My dear Mr. Archdeacon, " ^"^^^^^-^^^ P«l«-«' J"l7 30th. "May I request you to coraraunicate to the Clerev of v,i..r Ar,.l deaconry the following injun,.tion from mc a« ordinary fi ^ "" "That on the Sunday after the receint of if th^^ • *• . , - congregations, at the eon^clnsion of'^^:!:)^, in'^Z^^' r„u are earnestlj, desired to make ,„„, h„,^Me XplSL to 135 Almighty God, who ia the authoi- of peace aud lover of concord, that he will promote peace among our brethren in America, and inspire their hearts with Christian unky and fellowship. " ' To allow of which prayer a shori pauae will for the. preMnt be made after the suffrage in the Litany, " That it may please Thee to give to all nations unity, peace and concord" ; and also in the prayer " for all sorts and conditions of men" ; after the words " we commend to Thy fiitlierly goo '•'"'"<= i« 'woLl: T) to enlble . -■ " i-a--,= IV uc ijijiue iu Tiic (Jiesenbed pub- .Ji:^ or 137 lie prayers in oi^cr that the congregation may interpolate privatr prayers. There i8 but one place in our formularies where any suc-h ?^'lf^\\''''f^V^ri>osoo{ intei-posing private prayer is enjoined, namely, n the ordering of priests," where the congregation are "desired secrct- y m their prayers to make their humble supplications to God for all these things : for the which prayers there shall be silence kept for a space. Ihe v-ery fiict of such a pause being made the subject of express and positive rubrical provision here miUtates against an implied right in wW.T .t'^^r,^'"''''''-'"-*^' ordinary to direct, a similar pause else- where in the pifbhc services. The direction in the above rubric is exceptional, inasmuch as the lan- guage and spirit of the Act of Uniformity and of the Canons of 1603, contemplate public prayer, and not a mixture of public and privat^ prayer. ' "nr'S^-^''.^'^''?''l*V*'i'^J° ^^^ ordinary of enjoining the minister to proclaim or publish," must be construed with reference to the pre- ceding objects ot publication expressly enumerated-viz., the observance 3t holy days or fast days, celebration of the Communion, banns of matri- ;nony ; briefs, citations, and excommunications ; and applies to those ob- jects or to other matters cjusdem generis. The necessity for giving this power in the indefinite terms used, results partly from the omission, in other parts of the Prayer-book, of specific directions to the minister to give notices of a similar nature, and partly from the requirements of se- veral of the Canons. Thus in the Prayer-book there is no specific direc- tion to give notice of an intended confirmation or of a change in the hour ot Divme service. And though the rubric directs the curate to read ex- communications, the sixty-fiflh Canon requires that the ordinrry -shall first^ give order" to that effect. Again, under the seventy-secoTid Canon, mm^ters are-prohibited from appointing fasts without the direction of the Uishop. It is a rule that such a construction of a statute is to be favoured as hinders it from being eluded or frustrated. In " Arthur v. BoJsealiam." 11 Mod. 1()2, Ch. J. Trevor, says:—" In doubtful cases we may enlarjre the construction of Acts of Parliament, according to the reason and sense ot tlie law-raakers expressed in otiier parts of the Act, or guessed by con- sidering the frame and design of the whole." But in all the Statutes of Uniformity of Edward VI., Elizabeth, and Charles II., the same para- • mount object is apparent, namely, to provide " one uniform order cf common service and prayer," and to prevent every diversity in Divine service, so that " all tlie whole realm shall have but ' one use.' " (Pre- face to the Prayer-book : Concerning the Service of the Chureh.) If the Bishop of Oxford's injunction be legal, that principle ^ould be violated ; and in the fortv diocpses of Eneland and Tr-'lnnil r«v.-w r%.".==i. ble diversity might be introduced, incase the several bi.'^hops should 'think 1 1 J ** ¥ \ f ■ * I \ i ^ I.V. i ,, ■■ ♦ las jmo ,on l.a.. n.f«roncc to tbo civil war peuding io Amoriwa. If his Lord- 8b,,, 8 .n.,„no,H>„ bo legal, it would bo equali; legal fur tho Bl4o Ta t^7\h/ZT ^".T.'^.' '•" congregation t^ pr'y nK.ntHlirioi he 3ut and fWr li. 1^"""^ «* "'.^'^ '^' ^"PP"'^^^^' champion, of koti-skvery ; and for he li.shop of B. to -^-I' cannot be made 8, octuT .bo '"""" '"^•^^^?^^-«"-^ -.^^'*^-«t-l W tlu. ordinaries of tl^ re- spo, tno dKu-osos, as expressive of their individual sentiments. o2l wan- ^ '•!;^-r'; »-l-l*'off-k person. ; but ^u Ja pau.so ha« no Tnn i;7 r\r ' '" *^" 'P^'^' remembrance., in tl Prayer for all Comht.ons of Men as well as in tho General Tha )k.givin.r, thrremem tion, but audibly by the mmister in a prescribed form. ^ It cannot be maintained that the injunction simply requests the con. S2 n r^^."^^"*'^"^ ^^- r<^'."-y P-.ver to a'sycSTa^e forX notKtgven to the congregation is in these %vords, " You are earnestly de .red to make your humble supplications to Aln/ighty GoSwho Ts^ rif2w"?,n" ToTr'"^' Z^r '''''' b«-ts with Christian uu§ nr.?.lrj ^:i XV ""f "^ ^"^ ''■^•ch prayer a short pause will for tho present be made afler the suffrage in the' Litany, ' That it may please yXZ2 ^'"" v' *'^" ".:^^'«°« ""'fy. Poace, and concord."'.. !^. &« •humble s,.pphcat,ons" are taatamoutit in effect to an audiblo petit'oa niade by the mm.ster in the name of all ; for though nothing, is saiCDr y, an aotual uuulent of public worship takes place ; durbg ufo n^^^^^^^ the congregation prays. " uio pauses, For the foregoing reasons, wo are of opinion— ^ «; K- 'r ^^^ ^''^^""P^^ O-^f^rJ l"vs not a legal right to enjoin the cler- A. J. Stepjibns, CI, Chancorj-lane, Aug. 16, 1802. ^'"""^ "'"*• COLONIAL CItURCH GOVERNMENT. The following despatch to Lord Monck, with fhc accompanying ex« tract from a despatch to the Governor of the Cape of Good Hope, having been received in this Province, while the materiala forming the foregoing pages were passing through the press, it was considered advisable to pub- lisli it with them. The despatch and extract epeak for theraselvc?. " Downing-Btreet, 11th February, 1864. " My Lord — A correspondence arising out of the recent Judgment of the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council in the recent case of Long and the Bishop of Cape Town has obliged mo to obtain the opinion of the law advisers of the Crown on certain questions of much importance to the members of the Anglican communion in the Colonies. " That Judgment mainly related to the state of the Church in Colo- nies possessing representative Legislatures, but in which tlie Episcopal authority has not been made the subject of any direct legislation. But ht : ic of the questions which it has raised afe of general importance, and I think it best, therefore, to communicate to the prelates of the colonial churches an extract from a despatch addressed to the Governor of the Cape of Good Hope, embodying the decision to which I have been led on these subjects. " I enclose six copies of this extract, and I have to request you will comm;:ui(!ate a copy to each of the Bishops of the Anglican Church within your government. — I have, &c., (Signed) " Newoasvle. " Viscount Monck," «Scc. &g. &c." '■'Extract of a Despatch from the Duke of Newcastle to Oovernor Sir P. E. Wodehouse, K. G. i?., dated Feb. 4, 1864, No. 736. " In the first place, I am advised that (assuming that there is no local law to the contrary) the members of the Church of England in a colony in which that Church is not established have the same liberty of assem- bling for any lawful purpose which is posses'sed by members of any other religious denomination, and that it would be lawful for a Colonial Bishop or Metropolitan, without the consent of the Crown, and wifhout any ex- jiiesa ieglslulive uufhority, to summon meetings of the clergy and i»«y of .'.''• '* d wm I \ f I I 140 Int^l'""''^' ""'^e'-. the designation of Provincial or Diocesan "Synods, or ^ tnlSlZ'ZToTZ rl ''l^'^^r^ '' deliberating on matters'concern' A!here i^ I ' •' '" ^^"^ "''"'^ situation with any other religious body he meXi; of " Z^''^' P^^'*'«°' ^"^ ^'^ -«-^-« may adopt L' cllir w th^n tW^ ,'' <^?!^»"« ion may adopt, rules for enforcing dis- PoinTd tr' "T\" '^''^^ Church^over wl/om the Bth^'p hL been ai^ ■ C"atrntr;:o'Sese^d:.r" ''''' '''' '^'''''''^ ^ '^ ^^^^^^^^^^ these ?imlts""flhrfr'-f '^' ^'*'"" ^^ '^^ ^^^^'^ ^« '"'^^^'^ ^'^hin St whl^it in '""-'^ ^^" ^^ recognise it officially-to treat it as to pTacf a L r '''' • '' '■'P'^^*^^^^*^^'^ °f *^« An^icanClmrch,and disagreement^ J.T^i' ""'l'-?* "°^""'^"= ^"'« "« '"'^^"^l relations or disagreements, the funds which may be voted from time to time bv the ■ ^«f fixture in aid of the Anglican Communion. ^ i''^ ^^^'^ Assembly, 'until sips have b^naken To " WheTl ^: '™P"*'l'" of illegality, which at present atta.hefto it.' .^^uT ,• ? ® r" *''''^^ lastructions, I supposed that the Bishon could have httle real difficulty in ascertaining^ how fur the proceedings o^f the Syiiod had violated or had appeared to%iolate the prboils"^^^^^^^ down by the Court of Appeal, and I hoped (as indeed I .Sho£ th^t ^e members of the Church of England would be wTse eno "h To Lnce •?nl wh-J'''''',^"^'',f ^ by so doing to place their institutions on a foot ing wb.ch woald enable the Government to countenance them and to Prer'"anr"'"° 7'"' ""'"^^ ^^^^^"«^ ^^^^ relations wUlithrCivil Power, and expose them to continual collision with the law of the Co lony, to disastrous litigation, and perhaps to embarrassing dlfeat. VViih these tecl.ngs and wishes, I considered that it would be mo-jf rae^t'in.l tn f? T^""' '"^ ^^ m' "'?''" ^^'° construction on the Judg- ment, and to submit for my consideration such amendments of their cx- sting rules as, with least detriment to their own position, would enabl the evil power to give them its cordial co-operation. The Bishop, how- ever, professes his mabUity to understand me, and, I assume, deskes me to exHlain myself with more fulness. His principal difficultv t j\Z i-v-.v, to- ;iscenam wiml meiisurcs I hold requisite to remove the" imputL v_E- -^x:^x- Ul tlon of illegality to which I have alluded. The following cpiuions on this subject embody the advice which has been furnished me on this head. " The Judicial Committee, I am fully aware, did not decide that it was unlawful for the Bishop, with such clergy and laity of the Church as might concur in any scheme or arrangement for that purpose, to meet in a voluntary Syno- tion of tluiirO^ishop suitable forms of proceeding {as m foro domesticv) for the investigation, trial, and decision of offences against the laws of the Church, before the Bishop himself, or be ^ persons appointed by him. upon pryiciplas similar to those which prevr.il, for the necessary preser- vation of good order and discipline in all vohmtaiy religious bodies ; and I appl^hend that all persons who had assented to such resolutions would be bound by what the Bishop, fi'om time to titoe, might reasonably do in accordance with the forms so recommended. Upon this point I again refer to the Avords of the Judgment : — " ' It may ha further laid down that where any religious or other law- ful association has not only agreed on the t^rms of its union, but has also constituted a tribunal to determine whether the rules of the association have been violated by any of its members or not ; and what shall be the consequences of such violation, then the decision of such tribunal will be binding when it has acted within the scope of its authority, has observed such forms.as the rules require, if any forms be prescribed, and if not, has proceeded in a manner consonant with the principles of justice. " ' In such cases, the tribunals so constituted are not in any sense Courts ; they derive no authority from the Crown ; they have no power x)f their own to enforce their sentence ; they must apply for that purpose to the Courts established by law } and such Courts will give effect to their decision, ae they give effect to the decisions of arbitrators, whose jurisdic- tion rests entirply upon the agfeesaent of the parties.' "Haviugexpressed the opinion, that the Synod should repeal that resolution of their body which requires all Presbyters and Deacons before lustifutioQ or induction, or before receiving a license from the Bishop, to subscribe all their rules and constitutions ; it is proper for me to state further^ to what extent the Executive Government could recognise the right of the Bishop to enforce practically, on his own authority ,°the reso- lution which, in its present form, the Synod is called upon to cancel. " I am informed that it would be competent to the Bishop to adopt the course prescribed by that resolution, with respect to matters as to which he has by law a free and unfettered discretion. " Thus he may decline to confer holy orders on persons unwilling to be bound by the resolutions passed at su^h meetings, without being liable to any luterferencitf on ilits part of any Civil Court. But with respect to the power of the Bishop to make assent to such resolutions the condition 143 • of licenses, a«lmissinn3. or institutions of clerka to spiritual ofHccs, bene* firc-s or niro:', a dijitinction raust be made according to the uutiire of tb« oflice, bencHce, or cure. " If then- be no provioufl contract or trust, ex|>rc.s9 or inij)Iied, be- tween the Bishop and tlie patron, or the Bishop and tlie prc-^c liter, and if the office, bonofice, or cure in question has not been founded, endowed, or establiplied by any positive law or enactment, or by any other mode of lejral foundation incnnHistont witli the exercise, iti that respect, of a free and uncontrolled discretion by the Bishop, in these circumptances I am advised that it would be competent to the Bishop to make the license, ad- mission, or institution, of a clerk to a spiritual office, 'benefice, or cure^ conditional on his assent to such resolutions. "But if the Bishop be bound, with respect to such'benefice or cure, by any antecedent contract or trust (like the engagement to nnpoint tlic nominee of Mr. Iloets), or by the terms of any legal foundation of which assent or ohcdience to such resolutions forms no part, he cannot, under such circumstances, lawfully exact from any clerk, entitled to claim from him license, admission or institution to such office, beneticc, or cure, that such clerk should, as a condition of receiving such license or insti- tution, agree to be bound by such resolutions. "Witiiin the limits thus laid down, the exercise of tlio Bishop's dis- cretion in this respect should be recognized by the Kxeculive Govern- ment as legitimate. " Lastly, the Bishop requires to be informed^— " 'Whether the document which has been placed in his hands by the Crown is in all respects as it confessedly is in some, an ilio'^al instru- ment ; whetlier any, and if so, which of its provisions are v;ihd in law, whether it conveys any rights, thle, or authority to the Bi