The Express.
London, England, 1865-11-24 00:00:00

-------
701121BRAGDENS GOLD GA, &RD CRAIN&

;0118 BROGDZICSG OLD ALBERT CHAIN&

VEIN BROGDZN'S GOLD BROOCH CHAIN&

UN
WINTER OVERCOATS of the BEST
MATERIALS are kept for Inspection or sale at
HAMILTON lad KIMPTONE,
Tailors and Overcoat Mikan,
106. STRAND, opposite USW Hall.

LONDON must have a Supper and Music Room
toe Gestlwoeu.—leesember we welt for low at EVANS'S
altar Um Covent Garden Opera and the Theoren

ght (I; ra)regg•

TO ODPONDIOITS.
eslleeato Wended feeILPAS "
The Uprflill " London Evening
Ad
genet be e$ the 041 low 10. Bouverie4traeL, by The
rre eim on tit du of pablieglas.

PIATMARKIT.
Ten Scum.). MIME WILMS AFT= 4.IARRIAOIL—
MID UP. Me. Cholas Mathews. Mr. Howie ; Nelly Moore.
Ms. Fitwilliam. —WIIO KIUMD COCK BODIN Ileum C.
Mathews audChippeadala Kra C. %Ohm —And the BALLET.

TEM Irmo°, QM= LODGlNo9.—Alfter which IT IS
NIT= TOO LATE TO MEND. MouraMelville,
T. bleed, D. Murray, h. Callum°, F. Villiers. J. O. 0.
sod li. Caihurt : lasses L. Moore and K. Rodgers

LYCEUM.
Tins nylons°. THE DAY AYTER THE WEDDING. Mr.
and Mn. HOTEITI•3I. —THE WATCH CRY. *cora Vedder.
H. Wlddlcomb. & Emery. C. WHAM.
iaOlOM. ft
sad Mord; Miss YJaworthy.— tad HULSEY CUICINEatite.I4

isierrimnA.
TH2S gyolnrp. !MEIN, THE PEARL DIVER. —The
D'AubanA—Olmar, King of Scientific Gyl6lllMll.—With POOL
A DHOIL MrA 5. Lam.

HIGH WATZIL AT LONDOS-ARIDGL
/DLL DAT lionilag. 61). 21.n.....Afternoon, 5R UM.
TOLLOILLOW Monty. N. 6m.....Afternooo, Oa MLL,

LONDON, FRIDAY. NOVEMBER 24.

OF the many comments which have appeared
on the controversy between the Bishop of CAPE-
TOWN and the Bishop of NATAL we have seen none
so manly, so straightforward, or so pregnant with
important consequences, as the " Petition of the
" Bishops of the Anglican Church in New Zea-
" land" which has just been printed. Its authors
appear to possess, in a measure rarely vouchsafed
to the clergy of the present generation, the faculty
of seeing things as they are. The successive
judgments of the Judicial Committee of the Privy
Council, first in the case of " LONG v. the Bishop
" of CoerrowN," and secondly, in the " Petition
" of the Bishop of NATAL," have been accepted by
them not as opinions to be cavilled at or found
fault with, but as plain statements of fact to be
accepted frankly and loyally, together with the
whole train of conclusions which can legitimately
be deduced from them. There is no attempt to
fence with unpleasant truths, no trace of
any desire to pick out the parts which suit their
own purpose, and to reject whatever may be incon-
venient. On the contrary, they accept the de-
cisions of the Judicial Committee as constituting,
in effect, a formal die-establishment of the Colonial
Church, and they evince a business-like determine-
tion to reap the advantages as well as the dis-
advantages of the consequent change of Aitus.
Their petition seta forth, in the first in-1
stance, the consecration of the signataries
as Bishops ; their acceptance of letters patent
from the Crown ; and the subsequent decision
of the Privy Council, that in a colony
such as New Zealand, which is possessed of
an independent Legislature, those letters patent
can neither constitute a bishopric nor confer eccle-
siastical jurisdiction. With the position of affairs
resulting from this combination of events.the
Bishops do not attempt to quarrel. They do but
" humbly crave permission to surrender their
" letters patent, and to be allowed to rely in
" future upon the powers inherent in their office
" for perpetuating the succession of their order
" within the colony of New Zealand, and securing
" the due exercise of their episcopal functions, in
" conformity with the Church constitution," which
the petition proceeds to describe. First of all,
then, the bishops, clergy, and laity of the Anglican
Church in New Zealand have agreed upon a con-
stitution for associating themselves together by
voluntary compact. In accordance with this con-
stitution, Church affairs will be duly ordered,
Church property managed, internal discipline pro-
moted, and " sound doctrine and true religion
" maintained." Further, this constitution has
been recognised by an Act of the New Zealand
Legislature, under which numerous properties have
been vested in trustees appointed by the General
Synod, and regulations framed and a tribunal esta-
blished for the proper administration thereof. Be-
sides this, the General Synod has, "at a meeting
"held at Christchurch in May, 1865," framed rules
for enforcing discipline, and also, in precise accord-
ance with the judgment in "LONG v. the Bishop of
" Cierrowx," established a "tribunal to deter-
"mine whether the rules so framed and assented
"to have been violated or not, and what shall be
"the consequences of such violation." After thus
setting out their constitution, the Bishops go on to
claim for themselves and their flocks a position as
independent as that which has been conceded by
the courts of law in the case of Dr. Wieser; to the
Wesleyan Methodists. They quote the decision of
the Privy Council that the Church of England in
the colonies "le in the same situation with any
"other religious body—in no better, but in no
"worse position--and the members may adopt
"rules for enforcing discipline within their
"body which will be binding on those who,
" expressly or by implication, have assented
"to them." And then they point out that
the rules adopted by the Synod provide, first,
for • tribunal established by the voluntary
compact of the clergy and laity of New Zealand ;
secondly, for an appeal to the Supreme Court of
the colony, on the petition of either party, to
" inquire into the regularity of the proceedings
" and the authority of the tribunal ;" and thirdly,
for a further appeal from the Supreme Court of
the colony to the Judicial Committee of the Privy
Council " upon the same grounds ;" and, there-
fore, " that the Anglican Church in New Zealand
" is effectually guarded against the danger appre-
" bonded by the Lords of the Judicial Committee,
" that cases might occur in which there would be
" a denial of justice and no remedy for great
" public inconvenience and mischief,' without
" having recourse to a direct appeal to the Crown
"in the case of any controversy, such as that
" which is presented by the petition of the
" Bishop of NATAL." Lastly, the petitioners
" humbly express their conviction" that inas-
much as all the New Zealand bishoprics
were " founded by private efforts, and en-
" dowed by private resources," the right of ap-
pointment to them is not part of the prerogative of
the Crown, and ought not, therefore, to rest with
the advisers of the QUEEN ; and they conclude by
praying for an acceptance of the surrender of their
letters patent " now declared null and void," and
for a recognition of the inherent right of the New