,■«!.. <^; .'.:]* <\y.. ^^'\VZ^. IMAGE EVALUATION TEST TARGET (MT-S) . 6^ I L signifie "A SUIVRE", le symbols y signifie "FIN ". Les cartes, planches, tableaux, etc.. peuvent Atre filmAs d des taux de reduction diffArents. Lorsque le document est trop grand pour Atre reproduit en un seul clichA. il est filmA A partir de Tangle supArieur gauche, de gauche A droite. et de haut en bas, en prenant le nombre d'images nAcessaire. Les diagrammes suivants illustrent la mAthode. 1 2 3 1 2 3 4 5 6 ^ru,rusTTCE cue ask or ^° @ m s It BISHOP OF COLUMBIA versus REV. MR. CRIDGE. Judgment rendered on Saturday, October 24th, 1874, at 11:20 o'clock, A. m. This Is a case of an applicatiun for an injunction on a l)ill filed by the Lord Uhliop of tlia Dlxeae of Britiali Columbia against iiev. Edward Cridgo, clerk, praying tliat ttie delvndant may bo restrained from preiu-hing or revocation of tlie llceuiif on one, viz. : that on Article 17, a formiil adnioHition and then, without noticing 18, the Biahop says, lie munt still add further punishment aud decrees suspeiitdon from the Deanery, and theu gives oflciating in the cure of Christ Cliurch and frimi actingjaa his judgment, on the whole proceedings, to be revoca- •dsewhcre in the diocese as a clergyman of the estul lislied church, and for a declaration that the defendant's license has been duly revoked and ihut the defendant has failed to conform to the discipline and doctrine uf th« Church of England, and is liable to be removed, and i^ no longer entitled to the beneflts of the trust of the Indenture of bth May, 1861. The present appliciitiun is fur an ii\junction to restrain the detendaat fruiii tion 01 the license to preach and offlciato, suspension from the ofBco or dignity of Dean until submission and a formal admonition. This is the sentence, ia fact, the logical results ofwiiich the plaintitf now seeks to liave enforced by the decree of litis Cuurt In cun^idoring whether thi^t Court will grant ita auxilliiiry aid, the only questions to consider are those which arose in Dr. Warren's case, and in Long vs. The 'preaching or ofllciating in the said churcii of Christ illishop of Cape Town. The Uisliop having nii coercive Church or otlicrwise acting in the cure of tlie said church ^jurisdiction, had he, liowcver. Jurisdiction to summon according to his former license or elsewhere in the' I ho defendant to enquire into his conduct, to pass this ilioceso as a minister of the Church of England." judgment spiritually as it may be said. Unless he bad The Bill sets out the Letters Patent ana consecration j?*":" " '"'5'" *!!'" 9'"""' n,"!. !'"' '"t«'Tere or assist him oftlie plaiutiir to be Bishop or British Columbia, his """'y*''y- Neitlicr will this Court assist him if it ap- arrival here and license granted to the defendant to I'.'"'""'"""" '''f I"'"""'"'"'?" W'^'-« <;0"'lucted in an oppres- "preach and officiate," his selection of Christ Church to""»« "^V, or in any manner contrary to the principles be his Cathedral, his collation thsrealter of the delend-ii" .*'"'^'' "I'lest'on^ are examiii.Ml and detirmined liere. ant to be the Dein of the said Cathedral Church. i >'.'"""''" *'." it ""s'-t him il the sentences appear to be , L. , . »i .idisproporlionato to the alleged offence, or contrary to Certain Articles, tighteen in number, are then set py^ng ,,„|i(;yto (,^^110^^,, ^g if the defendant had forth in the Bill, iinpuanhing the coniluct of the de- fendant in his ministry, appended to which am many letters and documents, some of great interest to the par- lies to the correspondenca, but not very important to the determination of tha precise question before me. Whether the allegations of Ih:) articles thus stated are to bo taken as allegations made in the Hill itself may or may not be ail important question at the hearing The quu^liou whether they are well pleaded by this bill has not been raised on the arguments now before nie, wliicli, in justice to the defendant it must be said have been directed more to the matters really lying at the root of the unfortunate differences between the plain'ifT and defendant than to the technicalities or forms of plead ing, or even to the facts really necessary to be con- been sentenbed to do penance in a sheet with a taper, I do not think tliis Court would have anyt!> ng to say to such a sentence hs that, or if he were sentenced to de- privation or guspi'U.iion for once omitting a gennfiexion. I'he Ix'st test to jipply is this: Fortunately we au « branch of tlie Church ot EnRland not "in union and full coiiimiinion" oniy, but a branch of that very church. It we lt:iil liiM'e e..tablishd synids and canons ancen that he was entitled to have one or two partisans am ing tlie asses.iors, perhaps on tlie principle of ajury de medietate, which is uow abolished, in civil cases as from January 1st, 1875. But of onurso there was no shadow of reason in such an objection. The next objec- tion wn^ that inasmuch — it is not very easy to state it — iuasmuch as these assessors might more closely hava ap- proximated to the assessors described in the Cliurch Uisclplliie Act. though I can scarcely see how, therefore these proceedings were a nullity. But, 1st. It was not shown that better assessors could have been procured. iuil. It is not protended that even in England the asses- sors mint be of the character in tlie Act mentioned, but only that such assessors will be considered satisfact ry. 3rd. It is not pretended that the Act is applicable hero, or is law here at all. To impugn a judgment (if other* wise reasonable) because the proceedings on which it is baaed, do not tally closely enough (as alleged but not proved) with certain proceedings mentioned, net required in England liy a statute which is non-existent here is surely rather far. (( n npg|j(;pnt of niiitterof tiict iii)piiintB unci liccuKiB nil tho dilTcii'iit'tlio lorni« which KiiglJKh I.ny 'IriliiiimlH hiive dfcnKil niiiiiKtcra in tho oioccHu to their diflerent nireh; tliut li.> ruvdking dflendiuit'tt liciiice, hy tiueiicnriing him, hy IH'ihiij'B iiltiniati'ly de]>iiving hini ol' thJH riini ullnKe- thcr, lie will iicqiiire a right of prefentnlion t<> thin inue, (which 1 oheervcd counnel on both Bides carelully HliKtaiiied from enlliiig ■')( living") cud that thiH right u) jiredentation is an intcrcBt in the i3iBhop, which diKqiiali- tit'N him IVum being a Judge, even in the preliminary matter ot censun^ ; lor it was urged, the neglect even ot a eeiisuro may lead to further eccle«iasticul proceedings, and bo up to the most hardened contumacy, and incur- able obBtinacy, only lit to be cut off. And the presence uselul, nnd all but Ki-sential. 1 i-ay Knglii-h Lay I'rib, ulrit of Magna CliHita. In consiilering the chiirgis, anil sen- tences of September last, I think however, that iis to the scene In 'he (.'athidial. of the filli Pvci mber, 1872, it was not competent to the Hishop toiinew any eliarfre or in- of nu interest in a judge utterly disijualiflcH him aHd flict any further punishment for that otleiiee. I/brace the defendant's case and no other. If it he uniawlul for tho llishop to ceu'ure because the neglect of that may lead to suspension and so on, neither is it lawful for him to direct, becnusc tho neglect of his dir- ection I'lay lead to ii censure and the neglect of censure to suspeueion, and so on. On the other hand the Bishop here ijua Disliop appoints not only to this cure, but to every cure iu the diocese. So that the argument fairl> carried out is this: That because a inau is the Ilisliop of the diccese, tlurefurc for that reason alone, viittite itllkii, he is deliarred from either directing or suspcmiing any of tho inlerior clergy whom he may once have ap- pointed to a cure, notwithstanding any solemn vows and promises they swore Ic Uod. and to him when he placed tlieiii there. In fact tlialon the sole ground uf his being a Uisliop, ho is disabled from being n Ui-hop. For I wish | Ilisliop has dealt with that iitVenre by luain to iiniiress upon the defendant the consideration] 14tli December, lK7i. Ai;il tii'iiin I Cimjitntlim rmm nobody difpiitei- — not Mr. lioberlFini himsell,that there was a clear lieaili by the defendiinl not only of the Canons of the Chun li iiiid of the laws of Christian Charity and decorum, which are not always present to our minds, but of social eliijiiette and pro- piiety — restoaints to which we are moiv habitually ac customed, every one of uhicli forbail tlie defendant from thrusting himself fbi ward in the.presence of two Ilisho|;K, one a stranger to condemn a brother I'resi ytir, in terms which the defi ii and coiiduet." "I see I have clearly broken the caiinii which I snore to observe, .ind I have contravened thestntiite liy which all men are hound, and I have clearly exposed mysidf to suspension, I am very sorry and beg yon will remit tloi punislinient." It is needless to siiy that he never says anything' of the sort. Ibiw ver. I eiiii«ider that the bis ci-nsure of the il'li't ri'xnri is a which I tiirew out in argument, that tho very lir^t and higliest trust uiid duty, nmre than a right or privilege of a Bishop — his ratinaiMtimti — the reason for calling him what he is called is that he is to visit his clergy, "Bis- hop," "Visitor " "Overseer," the three words are almost identical; and the chief difference between them is that they are derived from the Ureek, Latin and Teutonic roots respectively. In at least one place of the new testi- inent the au:liurized version translates, "Kl'ISKOl'OS" (Kiiscopes) by the word ' Overseer " Mr. Kobert- sen's iirguiiieut came to this; That because tli<> duties of an overseer are ou here somewhat incomparable there- fore heC'iiild not oversee; at least that tlnnigh he might lawfully perform hucli duties as tlie defendant like' he was not to perlbnn such duties as the defendant objected to: fur it is to be observed that this is just as much an objection to the power of appointing, as to the power of ren.-iUriiig. The two powers it is said, are incompatible, therefore I claim, says tho defendent, not that both powers are void, but that I may treat the one as valid, the oih^r as invalid Tlie Bishop may lawtiiliy sppuiut me, but cannot lawfully censure me. But in f.iot contradic- tory powi rs are often in case of necssity placed in one hand. In this very Colony tliere is almo-t a case in point. Nothing -nrely can be more important than to keep quite distinct the judicial and executive functions. No niaxini of onr criminal court is better knnwn than, that i, I the absence of counsel, thejndgc is to be coiinseijniay he a beni'tit to be desired, but for a prisoner. Vet the legislatuie has thought it ex-ISynodlcal movement dons proceed peilieiit by repiMteil acts wliicli have always obtained'chiirch here assumes power to make laws and contained in tlieir letter of the '2nd of , Inly,) and taking nnnu intelligible grouuil (as might be expected) than they do, he points out that the proposed Synodical niovenii'nt might re- sult in placing liimself and his oongreg ,tion under a diireront law than that of the ('liiirch of Kngland. This I have already stated my tiriii conviclioii to be a very real apirehension. It may be a danger to bo avohled. it so sure as this surely as the any cannsel for the prosecution that the judge has been compelled to imbcate to tlie ocgistrar or to ii constable, what statute appeared suitable for the occasion and in what book the fill III of the inilictnieiit was shown. In fact all tlicBO regulatioi s are means to an end — that end is the administration of justice and tho repression of disorder — and to adhere to forms and prim iples in such a way as to suffer crime to go at largo unpunished, and disorder to be unrestrained, would bo 'to neglect the oys'ur lor the sake of the bUoU." for the time being, as njnrum ilnini'sliiiim, so surely will tho church hero ( I fear) one day differ widely from the .Mother Church in forms and ordinances and matters of Church (Juvernmeiit, and probably also by decrees, even in some particulars of doctrine. 1 was about to refer to Lord Komllly's judgment in "Iho Bi. bop af Natal vs. dladstone," but I find I haro nearly repealed his words which have imprinted themsolves on my memory. The position advanced at tho bar, however, and which wag probably necesiary for the rebutting the whole case ^ ni. of the platntilTwent far beyoni this. Had th*d«fan cl<'ur iiml xatiHlartory Ibiiiiiliitiiiii. Of.atl be oontciuiril was all he nifaiit in that letter i)f the 3iil tliiit ll;;lit and of all tliose dirtcussionrt 1 can iioW'(Hf#il ol' July, wimt may in fact lie a fair i'onntruction to put niVKi-lf t^'' upon It, prelaccd with au acl«nowli>dnini'ut of his error. 1 Hut if a voluntary asNocialion out lierc had lieen lllieliad Haid "my breach of the eanon and of tlit' Ntatuti* and of good manners, I am heartily sorry for, and I fully Intenil to off.Mid so no more, and I tliank you for your lenity in only censuring mo for my otlenc , 1 forniid of persons iiuldinjj; the doctrines of llie niiurch ol Knuland but n.jeclinn or allerinj; wliolly or in jiart the discipline and j;'>\ei iHui'iit of tlie<.)liurcli of Km;land — that would be a course peifictly open to any number know that every man in the diocese whoso opinion ia;of persons to pursue I appreliend, anc tlie piesi'nt wortli cariu); for, my own counsel and all, are heartily jliishop mij^ht be amonK tlo-m — lint tliat association Horry that I acted so. Your visitation I will ilutilully rp-iwould not be at; actual br.iiicli of the Cliurch of Kng- ceivo. KverythiuK shall bo at your service. The pul-,land, though it mij^lit insist that it was in full iiiiion pit of the catln^dral ! nave no tlioUKbt of closing to you, 'and oommuniou with it, and held all its uoctrines. If but as to the synodical movement which your lord«liip|dissensions arose in such an association, iis members is BO earnest In pressing on my congregation and else-;would liave recours* to the civil tribunals and .'uy quos- where iu your sermons and iliscourses, I would witliltions woulil have to lie tried by their own rules and like I arnestness entreat you toconsider and well weghjordiinnces, wliich would have to be proveil by evidence l.ord Koiniily's words. I know it is not for us to judgOiin the usual manner, and have to be conrM'ue express my perannal predilec- tions at all, but sitting here as a judge I fopl how im- nio:isely my responsibility is lessened and my ability for comprehending the position increased in comparison with tho occasion when somowliat similar qi itioiis were brought for tho first time on somewhat similar disputes before the Supreme Court in South Ulrica. Siuce that time a Hood of light has been poured upon the constitutional questions, and the relations of eccle- siastical and oivil jurisdiction iu the colonies by the lalors of the great judges aiul civilians in the Privy Council and elsewhere, and thu whole matter has beeu discussed repeatedly iu various courts un various rights, by various minds of the most learned lawyers aod most sincere and earnest churchmen and statesiueu in £ag- posing tho eeveral fl .cks are members and brethren of the Church of England in tlio strict senso of tho term. Tlie consequence is, that they have in all mafters eccle- siastical, voluntarily submitted themselves to the con- trol of the Uishop of Natal, go long as it is exerci.aed within the scope of hii authority, awording to the prin- ciples prescribed by the Church of Kngland. If, how- ever, any sentence of tho Bishop of Natal should be contested, recourse must be had to the courts estab- lished by law which will enforce that sentence if pro- nounced within the scope of the legal authority of the Bishop, and if ho has in arriving at the sentence pro- ceeded in a manner consonant witli tho principles of justice, aud in so doing the Court established by law will proceed upon the laws of the Church of England. So far as they are applicable in Natal," i. «., the spiric thougli not the letter of tho Church Discipline Act, is to be adhered to. It is not law here but it is to be takeu as a guide. Now I apprehend every word of that quota- tion is not only very good law, but very good sense, and not only good sense and law, but a most convenient law for tho protection of rights. Not only for obtaining judicial decisions upon them, but for knowing before- hand aud without litigation, the limits of rights and duties of all members of tho Church layman ami clerica'. It only requires that the name should bo ch ing'^d ; for "Natal" read ''British Columfda," and on this particu- lar point it exactly status the position hero. The^o considerations make it clear aa I have said bofore.thitt it was necessary for tho defendant's case to go tar beyond any reasonable or indeed possible cou- strnction of the defendant's letter of the 3rd of .luly, even if that letter embodied or referred to the church- wardens letter of the 2ud of July, which it is by no means clear that it did. The defendant cannot maintain his present position of preaching aud ofBciating in Christ Church or Id any Church oi Eagluud iu the 195860 ^v. dioceso or nt nil us » olornvnuin of tlM Church of Kng- liind, liy niaintaing hia right to do what hu did mi the day of the coiisocrittlon of the now Cnthi-dral, which wan the poHitioii he took on the 2Stli March. It is not ennuKh for him now to allege as in his letter of the 3nl of July, vague charges of the "illegality of the BlKhopg procpndlngs in sundry matters nlTi cting the church," or th« Biithop's ' endeavoring to draw defendant and his con- gi'egaticin" away under another law than the Church of England's or preaching dnctrloes offensive to the defend- ant, though the question "synod or no synod" Is surely no question of doctrine at all, but aniy of expediency or utility. It is not even enough to allege as in the churchwar Ions letter of the '2nd of July (liut I again observe that I do not thinit it proved that the rs of con- stitutions made in conventicles censured," " Wluwoevcr shall heroaft.)r afflrm that it is lawful for any sort of ministers aod lay persons or eithar of them to join to- gether and make rules, orders, or constitutions In causes ecclesiastical without the King's antliority and shall ■ubmit themselves to bo ruled and governed by them, let them be exconimuiiicatrd i;wo/adi). and not be re- stored until they repent and publicly revoke tliose wick- ed and anabaptistical errors " Now the first observation that arises on that is, that if there were anything in the objection, Mr. Long and the Bishop of Cape Town, and the Bishop of Natal and Mr (lladstono and Lord ll'ith r- ly, the Coleridges, Koundull Palmers, Baddelcys and other learned civilians tlio Lord Chancellor and mem- bers of the judicial committee, who have bi'cn engaged for so many years in sitting the South African cases, had all been beating the wind, and expendingall their learn- ing anil anuteness and distilling principles out of the Alembic of Kcclesiastical suits. Privy Council appeals and Chancery suits to very little purpose Indeed all that has been said in all these complicated reports U quite unnecessary and may be treated as nlMnr ilivla, if this contontiiin is maiutainnble. For nothing I suppose is clearer than that bishop Gray had actually carried into pr.ictice in long detail and personal applicatioii everything and more than everything that tlie present plaintiff is even supposed not ever to have done, but to hilve wished to have done. But in that case Mr. Kobert- Bon's argument would be very short. Bishop Gray from the moment he asserted the legality of a synod, ceased to be a Bishop at all of any legal diocese (I do not know that it is necessary for the argument tliat ho t;u'o fiul)> ceased to bo what may bo termed a Bishop nnattaclioil), consequently from that moment had not nor could have any jurisdiction qua bishop over any member of the Church of Kngland. It is odd tnat nobody ever thou^ihi of that before, that is it would be odd, If there were any show of reason in the argument. But in fact the errors denounced by this canon are as it expressly says, "an abaptuitical errors." In the previous century, scarce a geueratiou before the canons, certain fanatics, with a largo support of the ignorant misses set themselves up as in-'pired by an inner liglit, and author- ized by It to announce a new order of things. Their code of morals was tint to the truly rigliteims all things were lawful. The priesthood they announced to be a gen- ral dignity to wliiehall .1; .. might aspire. As to tempor- al thiuf s their argument was very short. It consisted of three plain and very intelligablu sentences : "The earth is the Lord's and tho fullness thereof." "The Lord hiith given the earth to be an liilieritance for iiis !Y th<< simple expression of tlieir opinion, annul the Queen's Letters Patent, fuliiiinate sentences of excommu- nication and ileprivation, comu to a rexdiition that their leader is entitled to tho full enjoyment of valuable lands, decile on the interpretation of a deed of trust and determine that the same bader is entitled to the benefit of that? and absolve whom they please lioni tho observ- ance of solemn vows? Is it the pluintilf ho advances tl.se preposterous pretentions? l»o these terms convey an exaggerated expression of the defeinlant's case 7 It is hardly worth while to go on bronking this but- terfly on this wlie.d. Yet these further observations may be useful whicli by tlieniselves dispose of the whole argumeut on this liead, even if my view of the meaning of theCiinon draw I from history be wholly wrong. It is quite true, ns Mr Long observes in his letter, invited and approved by Lord Roniiily, p. 48) that u man ovin a Bishop, may by his own act. secede from a church. Kven secession, however, would jirobably still leave him a Bishop until lie be deposed or deprived, by the sentence of a competent court consequent on bis secession. But Btill if a Bishop hail openly announced his secession, that would greatly excuse the disobedience of Ills clergy even before any tornial sentence of deprivation. What .Mr. Uoliertson failed to establish is the first step, that a man can commit excommunication upon himself or de- clare himself excommunicuted. All he cun himself tlo I in this way, is to excommunicate all tlie rest of the w'orld, as I believe one or two fanatics liavo been found luad enough to do by decbiring all mankind eternally ilost except themselves. A man may undoubtedly com jniit an offence which exposes hliii i/wo/acto to ex onimu- nication; that is whe.i brought up bef ire a proper court, I tho uccuHor has but to examine tliisune point: it proved, V. Bontonco of excommunlciitlnn may lie pron-mcod nt onc.i, witliuiit more. It ia prolmlilp hImd tlmt in audi a cnsu the ciiiHt'quenccs of tlio seiitHiico, wluin pron'iuiiced, would have refwreiice ImcU to thi> hnrotical, or other net, on which thn sontcnco in I iisml ; much In tliu Hiimo mitn- ner an an iidjuilicatloii ot'o inkruptcy relates hiick to the act of haiikriiptcy, anil Jons not count for all purposes, from thu diite of ihe adjudication only. U"re there i< no deflnito net of liankruiitcycven alleged. But sentence passed here, recognizing or confirming the IiOtte'» Patent, the Bishop would have full coercive jurisdiction as from that time. I am far from saying that this i» prohahle or even dosiralile. I think that such jurisdic- tion is much more safely and heneficlally for all parties, placed in the liauds of tills Court Not that I have the smallest opinion tlmt my judgment is supirior to that of the plaintilT, on the contrary, I wish to lie understood as placing very little conlldenco in my own juilgment. of excommuncatliu be pronounced. It must be liut I hjive the greatest confiileHce in the Judicial Com pronciunced by ncompe court, and after a trial ntnilttee of the I rivy Council, andso long as the pl.iint.fT's least conlbrmable with natural justice, upon proof, sentences have to come to this court to be enforced, ho and nfer summoning the accused. Ana sentence of excommunication rt,ay be followed no doubt In the case of a Bishop by sentence of suspension or deprivation, or such olher sentence as a court of com- petentjurisillctiim may tliink fit to pronouce, if any. But that too must be by a court of compet'-nt jurisilic- tlon,, after a trial consistent with natural Jus- tice and so on. It would be a poor jest and nil the church liere, and in fact all denominations and religions have the advantage of the appeal to the i'rivy Council, which otherwise would nut lie, but there would be only an iippoal from the plainliff to the Arch- bisliop of Canterbury for the time beiiig. Nnw placing as I do, great confidence in the wisdom and learning of that great probite and of those who may succeed him, I must say tliat I nevertheless fool very much more confl- to ask if any such investigation or sentence has taken ^dence In the wisdom, in tiie learning, and above all in the place. But" what is, perhaps, not unintaresting to re- coherency and cunsi.teucy of the Judicial Committee, mark, is the extraordinary iuciipaeity of even the most tlian in the decisions of a series of Archbishops of wluit- conscientious man to act towards others on the golden ever see. Then besides the secular Jurisdiction tlius rule of doing as he would be done by. Here is a nniuj imperfectly bestowed, the plaintilT has his spiritual who, for offences rrally open, glaring, not denied, but|authority derived from the imposition of hands, wliich gloried in, offences against canon law,again9tst'iitue law, [though vngue, and I conceive, left by our cliurch, pur- against common sense and ordinary good manners, Iposely indeflnito, can never bo treated l)y anychtirch- after the utmost lenity and forbearance shown towards j man ivs loss solemn on that account, but rather as all tho him, is at last cited, before a self-organized tribunal.! more impressive Ho is sent out here by all the author not a court of course iu any legal seuse, or with any ity of the Crown and of our church not to be taught, but legal powers, but as good a tribunal as could be formed to teach orthodoxy, not to be rsviied, but to reprove in the diocese — clearly as respectable a tribunal as any Cliamber ot Commerce or Board of Surveyors — and after weeksof notice, and days of trial in his presence, Is at last found, by that so-called "Court or Board of Inquiry" to have committed acts which, as I have said, be never denied, and openly glories in; and yet for weeks the whole city haa tieen disturbed by the vocit- erous clamours of his partisans — I will not say of him- Belf, for I bolievo he is but the instrument of others — against the illegality, the injustice, the monstrous nature of the tribunal, and the ilodiiigand the sentence: and at least if tho defendant does not openly join tn these clamours, he utters no word to brand them as un- founded and slanderous. Nay, his counsel liere argues most temperately and discreetly I admit, bat vigorously, on tho same side, namely, that the sentence against tlie defendant was inconsistent with natural Jus- tice. And yet this same man thinks it consistent with natural Justice, and that he is dispensing to others tho same measure of justice, wherewith lie seeks to be judged himself, that the Bishop should bo held to have lost his whole position without any trial, by the sentence of no court or any tribunal resembling a court, without notice, without summons, without buing even put on his defence, by a mere oral suggestion of counsel. Surely the old proverb of straining at a gnat and swallowing a camel never received so exaggerated an illustration I I'lie position and status of the plaintiff liere seems to be much misunderstood The fact is that tho Lord Bishop of British Columbia holds his Jurisdiction, his error, and to receive all dun obeilieuc« from the mem- bers of the Church of England hero. The Bishop till he be duly deposed or deprived will be considered as a Bishop exactly in the same way as a llconsed clergyman until his license is dc.ly revoked, is to be considered a licensed clergyman still, whatever his offence. I should wish Mr. Robertson to try and find out how loudly his client would have protested if the Bishop had said nothing for the last two years ; no Pandora street trial had taken place but, — Mr. McCreight had suggested yesterday for the first time, "Oh I tho defendant appears to us to have committed an offence on tlie Stli of December, 1872, for which the statute says the Bishop should suspend him. It is true we have still j never mentioned the matter since then, but wo now submit that he must be considered as having been sus- pended as from that date." Yet this is really less than the measure wherewith he geeks to mete out Justice to his antagonist. Au obvious comparison may serve to explain the nmttor to the non-ecclesiastical mind. Suppose a trader, a" many traders do, to have committed au actot bank- ruptcy upon which no steps were taken an'' after a lapse of time a customer were to say, "I shall not pay ycm for those goods I have received from you, you are en uncertificated bankrupt," I aiiprehend the reply would be in a tone of indignant surprise. "It is true some time ago I committed or suffered such an act, which would have empowered a Court of competent jurisdiction, if they had thought fit after summoning powers, and his authority so far as it can ije derived from I me and hearing tlie whole case, to have adjudicated me any temporal authority, from the same Royal and !a bankrupt. But who are you? and what right have Supreme Source of all authority in the British Domin ions, by an instiument as solemn as I hold myownCuMi mission and derived directly from tlie Crown under llor Majesty's Sign Manual. It is true tlie powers so given require to be suppleniontBd, soino of t. era Oy the author- ity of an Imperial or local Act of Parliament. My own commission is sanctioned by both, and that being thn method by which Her Mi Josfy can constitutionally give coercive juriBdiction,coerciveJuiiBdiction is placed in the hands of myself and the different Judges in the various Supreme Courts tnrougln.ut thn Britisii Dominions. Ni'Wthe plaiiifia''s Letters Patent assume to give him fnll jurisdiction, and they would probably have nt once given him such jurisdiction if his diocese hail been in a Crown t'olony, — though I rather doubt this — but the terms are certainly ample to give him full jurisdiction. you to take upon yourself to say what decision the court might have Come to? Now I sliall make you pay even to the uttermost farthing." This I say would prob lio vulicl, then' Ih In tin' iiiuitiiUriio n the llislicpp'n mitliDi'lty. For it now Fipiioara tImt tlio oloiiil iiiiil ii ilisuiiii'c iicci'SKiiiily liiiii({hi(;ovur cvmy wifw (li'tV'nrliint inii^t tliorchy luive niciiiit lli;it lie only liiti'nil- iiirl I'vory clilld oIniicIi ii iiiitri'liii;)i ; llio iii"i't> doiilit Ih eil >o ri'ulnt the liiwfnliii'H.s of tli« liiBliop'H Hiiilioiltynliiioit uh Imd iii tlio ciTtniiity of tlm liiviiliility. It is ik altogittlicr, iinil not tliti cxuroisK of it, it It wnru lu'M.lri'rli in.-tniii'is of tlio «\ti'ciiio iliiiiKi^r ot liritniiin|{ to ultiiimtcly to hn lawlnl. TImt of courso is lioliliiig ont'wlii.t wi- suppoHo to ho tlio voicn of ounHcioiici' ; liiio ixu DO olive hnincli nt nil liiinn Ki'iiiTiilly ropiitod to ho of tlii' iitniortt liiiiii iiiily luid Iliivii'i; thou exiitiiinpil thoHo Piindnra utri'ot pro-]tlio ntiiiont coiisoiiMitioiirinchu, who di«ohi'ys tlio cli'iiriHt cei'dinKH much moro minntidy tliiiii iiuihiips I liiivo niiy words of ii koU'Iiiii iiiid rcdlcnitiil vow, with the in'cos- riglit to oxiiniinu tlioiii (looking to Dr. Wiutoh'h c iho) J Hiiry iind d'libcruto roHiilt of iiillicliiiK thu iiioHt crnul in- huvo conio to Iho oonclnnlon tliii tlio phiiiitllT is ii Ilhlmp Jury upon poor woiiiun wlmin pi>rliiips ho novcr sitw of the Church of EnKhtnd, iiiiil thn ilvfuniliint is a clin');Y-ihc'fori', ami i;on<'riitlons, porliiips of iiiihoin chlldri'ii, man of tho aamo chnndi ; ilint tlio proci'oHinfCs in PjiiiMtml this in ohudii'iico, as ho Kiippos>s to tlio ilictitos of (l"ra "trout thoiiKh not aixordiiiK to tlio prociso form his consoioiiou. It is Hiniply an iihiiso of toriue;. Thoro enggeHtod (not roipiirod) hy tho Cliiiii'li Dlsciplirn Aot is no conseionco in thu inattor at all, in tlio sonsu in in Knglanil, wero yet in a ronsonahlo analogy with li, wliiuh that word is iinduriitooii hy tho Court or hy any the asii'ssorial part hiing ditfiMcntly conxtrnctod troiii person of nndorstandiiig. It was long ago poiiitoil out tliat in Long vs. tli" Ili»hop ofCipo Town; that tho pro-'hy Lord Coli(! that a good man will olicy lliu laws, and cuodings woro condnctod in a way consonant witli tho ho fjiiotos thu huatli"n pout, (wlin ni ly give many los- princlploH of jnstloo as understood in a Court of Kqnity : sons to us Christians), iinsworing tlio (|Uustioii " I'ir- tliiit thu findings woro true, and that tho Bontoncos anilfcdrtiH e»< q lis / " witii tho roacienco! — or else tlioy ire in roiHty mentally iii- riiigo celebrated liy the defendant, and the de.'ision in capable of uudiirst. Hiding fmr lines of pure plain Kng- oUBCiise will nit hu of any binding foice iu any other lisli and uood senso, in wliicli case with what countcu- Vll. nuco ciiii lip or tlmy oliilm to form I'vuii a coiiji-ctiiriil opinion upon iimttorn rniilly olmciiri'? IF a iiiitii ciiMiiot iiiiiIoihiuikI tlir Ktrd ciiiioii liow cun lio cliiiiii to iliriM^t dm In tliii iuii/.c< of I'CilcrtiuHtlciil l.iw ? "A nii^tity iimzn tlioiiifh not without II plan." Ilut liow ciiii tliu ili'f'iiil- nut lilt iiuitKiiii'il to liiivu II cIpw to it ? (u- cliilui >i ri|{lit to (lirHct otiiio's in It? or even to v,n\k in It ''V liiiiiHt'lfi' If Huy iniiu uvur Wiintuil an ovor.suL'r, miruiy tliix niHU lluCH. Tho cniiitini? iind revocation of a llcimm" iiro very niuili In lliu cpHcopiil illsci'i'tion (l'ooln'« ciihu) iit leHHt iiH to curiiti't who iiiijoy mily a Htlpcuil. 'I'lin cnnn miiy or may not lio ilirTi'riuit, wliiir» tliu ri'vociitlon iluprivoH II <'li'i');yiiiiin of hin ri^lit to ii Irituliolil lioncilcu. All tliitt ni'cil liu Hikiil on that iirxuniunt in, tliut it iloun imt iu'Iho liitrii. Oil lliii iiiiiti'rial.i now liotoio mo I inuHt takuitatall uvi'iitH, that tliiM'ti la no frcekolil iMtiiollnc holil by tliu llciMi^ti. It WH3 very Btningly urKoil, liow- cvur.at tlui bar, ih it wlioro u IIcciiho in no conpluil wllli pi'ciiiiiary iMnoliiini'iit tliat tliu iiioiiiy cannot be pocket- oil iinli'iH tliH licL'iisi- lie uontiiiiuiil, niicIi licuiHu caniio< liu iirbltrarlly rovokfiil, vltlii'r in aii'occliHliifilical or uii) other ciiHO. 'i'lieie ih inui'li foico in ths arguineiit ho far an till- Wiiiil ■•arliitr.irily" eiiterH Into it. Dr. I'ovah'H case Ih ail aiithoriiy for tliat. In fact I'oile'n caae. though it di'Clarea that tliu llishop or Archliishop haa a discretion, InaiatH alao tliat that didcretion aliall ho lila- creetly exerciaed, i. '., not wantonly nor without due coii-iiieriitioii, iior witlioiit noticn to the curate; hut when ail exeiciaed tills di»cretion will not be iiiterlored with. There liiuat be aomo aiitliority aoniewherc. I have little doubt but Hint it exi^la in tliia Court, tu oxaniiiie on miiii'diniitt, or prohibition, or bill for in- Junclioii, or In aoine way, into tliH exeiciae of Ihia discre- tion by the Uialiop. t. e , iia in I'ovaliN ciisk, into the ni inner in which the discretion liaa been cxerclaed.! lint if the Hi.shop liaa exanined duly and diaaiiproves, L nil Ullenbiiroiigli intiiiiatea that the Court will nut say ''approfe though you do not approve, take our coii- gcifliice iuHtead ofyoiir own." 'I'lii.s ia e.specially true perhiipa i( the liiieuaola acoinipani-id by any iiitereat or di);iiity. lu fact I h ive been ixaininiiig into tliat dia- cretiun ill lhi.4 very caae; I am not aure that I wag uii- thori/.ed to do an, lint itaeeinod to he the ileaire of both parties and the ilefeiiilant at least loudly demanded it. I do not n could nut be alluwed t>i aland, it must ataiid until it is| dissolved *Atid so with the ilef.'iidant'a bcenae, until he geta 'I license from tlio llishop either coiupulaorlly or by the order of some coiupteiit court, or voluntarily by making a proiier acknou bdmentol Ilia errors, and pray- ing I'oi'giveiiess and promlaing a> eiidmeiit he IS un un licensed rbigyniiin. The Act of Uiiilorinity, Miya lie Hiiall n it bu aiiowed to jireach or olhciate, not at least; IIH a clergyman of the Cliiinh ut England, nor in a building consecrated to the aervico of the Church ot; Kngbind Nor has the Hlohop any choieo •rlinther he will or not take these proceedings or «ome proctedlngi (or preventing him from so doing. The llishop, toiise the wolds of fir lii/i bert .leiiner Fust. In lliinler I'.t l.angley, "wuulil not have properly dlsrliarged the diitlea of bU high olllce," if he had permiileil iin unlicensed jieraoii so to preach or iiflleiate. Therein ofcuiirae iinllmlteil free lorn of conscience hero iih in Knglnnd. Kruryhodyi whether he Iihh ever 1 n ordiiliieil In the Church or iiot.ln at liberty so far as the .ay eniirta are coMcerned, topreai li what he liken and where ho llkea, (within cerlain liinltd of public duiiMicy.) Only the law aaya, 'You hIinII not do this In the character of a cbrgyman of the Church of I ngland, nor In any Kiiglish Cliiiieh, without the license of the llishop You may not run with the hnre and hunt with the honnda." The defendant's CMiinsel urged that this rule does not apply to the defendant, beinuse to ap|ilv the rule would be to deprive him of $i.iU per (iniuim. Heiilly I think that is a case nf oppression of c inscience, this is a very curious line of argument. You are opiuessing a man's cousi i>-nce if you rrliise to allow liini to ontinue receiving $i MJ per annum when he breaks every Htlpulation upon which it was to be paid tu lilm .Ni'iw the law lays down the same rule fur all religious denominations aiel iiub ed for all voluntary asiociatieiis here religious or aiciiliir. Leave the a« Hoclution and yuu may do aa you like. Ilut you hIiiiII not be allowed to occupy the Church of your denomin- ation or Ihe .illUes ol your .loiiit Stock Company (I muke the ciimpirisoii with some apology, hut really tlie prin- ciple is exactly the name) and at the aairie time set at detlance the rulea of the voluntary assocbi ion to wlilcli you any you belong. Nay, more; you ahull not bo allow- ed to aCt here or ho d yourself out as the agent of the aaaociation, trading or utherwlse, against and in ilelliince >f their rules. Kveryluuly Will see the nionatroua in- ju»tice£f allowing the Secretary of iin Inaurance Co , after hXbsa been anspended by the manager, tocontinne in occnBatiou of the Company's oflicea or allowing him to set up next :!oor, or any wliero within the sphere of the C'/inpany'H business, mn! hold himself out to the world aa secretary to the Company still. And anrely the injuatice 1 1 the Company would not he less if the court by reluaing to interfere enabled this xot i/i.«f»U secretary to draw salary out of tlie companj'i funds. That really is the whole of the i asa. The manager may be wrong but wliilo the aecrctary ia suspended, he really may not stay there. 1 haveendeiivoreil to malco clear to the defendant in the comae ot the argument, the result to which every-^ thing pointed, and I have given eveiy opportunity in my power, and used every eigument which suggested it- self, to endeavor to heal an anticifiated lireiich in our little coiiiHiunity. I feel aure that if the defendant would but liateii to the words of his counsel, instead of yielding to the fatal influence of heated and ignorant partisans, matters might even now be healed, Aa to tliia beluga ipiestion of conscience or conscientiaisneas, it is a mere delu-don ti suppose tliat conscience has anything to do with the jireaent diapute. Mr. Keecea ductrino has never been approved. The defendant's doctrine his never been Idanied. Both genllenieii are prubilily within the true limita of dontrine deemed by our Church to bo necessary. No right of conarlenee Is or ever has been sought to be invaiied here, except the right thit every man may do just that wliich is guild iu his own eyea. If that be what is meant by "rights ol c ■nscience" there ia no more to be said, but thai allcasea and instances of society, in Church and ill St.ite, lu tr ide and in the fiiniily, the most savage and the most polite alike, are constructed and can alone cohere on the exactly opposite principle: vi/,., that if society is tu subsist at ail. men can mil he permitted to do everything that is right iii,thrirown eyea. And all laws and regiihilioiisof sm iety, are at bottom nothing more ihan a statement of what a man may do, and what a man may not do, of those tli ings which afipear to him right, or desirable. The plainlitf in this case appears to me to have acted villi excessive forbearance and long suffering, lie now comes hero in perlormance of a statutory duty, the contained neglect of wliicl; would BUbjectliim to very painful personal conjciiueucti, and Vlll. It even appniiM to mo thit the Clmrchwiinlonn of ChiUt CImrcli, (irporhiips liny three or more mumherii uf the conRrogii'loii might probiihly hiivo nicoHosfully »pplled for a munilamuii very muiiy months iino to compef the Iliahap to interfere much ninro vlK'nouHly thiiniie hiia (lone. I nin very liir from B«yiri({ ilie court coiiM Inter- fere/ without the llltihdp, or in iiny wiiy excnptaiinply to Buppiy coercive power to a l.iwful order. Ills re- luctitnoe to exert bin power ni'iy iiowever, ubvl mily bi^ Imputed to m itiveit of the miiRCclirlnilaii forbonrancei il ii the proverliliil pr penalty of biBho|i>4 whlth givea rise continunlly toeompliiintg. It certnlnlv iloea noi lie hi the detendant* mouth to rnUe any objecilonifinn tlu' ■coreoflacbeH, and to do him luitice, he did nM rnim- any inch ohiectlon. But it the dufondKiit had been at OBce la Uecembar, 18T2, excluded Irom the p«lpU of Chrixt Uhiirch, until dueaubmUKlon I ihould not now hitrehad the moat pulT.ful duty ofiittendliiKto thia dU< treaaliiK ciiae, aifd proh.ibly much corre^poHdence ol * moat dia'«t(rHe>ilde nature w