The Express.
London, England, 1853-02-17 00:00:00

THE EXPRESS, THURSDAY EVENING, FEBRUARY 17,

" That the machinery for conducting the preliminary in-
quiry by commission should be made less cumbrous.
" That envision should be made for the trial of clergy-
men before the bishop or his official or commissary, assisted
by a council of not more than fire members, who shall de-
' aids all questions of feet ; the said persons not to be named
by the bishop himself, but to be taken by lot or otherwise
as shall seem most, espedient, either from the canons resi-
deatiary, nos-residentiary, and honorary, and thi rural
deans of the diocese, or from a panel of beneficed clergymen
elected in every archdeaeonry for this purpose.
"That the greatest difficulty besets the due adjustment
of the MUM of dual appeals.
" That it appears to your committee of the greatest as:-
count, whilst we maintain the just supremacy of the crown
as the ultimate source of justice and redress to every sub-
ject complaining of wrong, whether in matters ecclesiastical
or civil, to combine therewith security, that ecclesiastical
questions shall be decided by persons qualified by office
and acquaintance with the course of law ecclesiastical to de-
cide thereon.

" That it appears to your committee that the acknowledged
difficulties which attach to this subject have been much in-
creased by recent legisiation, which almost accidentally
transferred the hearing of these causes from the Queen in
Chancery to the Queen so council.
" They would suggest the expediency of considering
whether the best solution of this question would not be to
restore this jurisdiction to the Queen in Chancery, and to
enable her Majesty, when any appeals shall be presented
from the court of the proviaco in matters ecclesiastical, in
which any clerk iu holy orders shall be a party, except in
causes matrimonial or testamentary, to remit the cause for
rehearing in the court of the archbishop, providing that
there should sit. under the authority of the great seal, with
the judge of that court, other ecclesiastical and common
law judges, to hear and decide fivally iu the cause.
"Finally, your committee report that they have felt it
their duty to lay these conclusions before the Convocation,
as what would form the fitting heads for an &Wren to her
Majesty, should one now be resolved upon by the Convoca-
tion. But tlicy beg further to report their own conviction
the na such address should be adopted without a full and
patiant examination of the whole subject ; and they would
there fare respectfully suggest to the Convocation their
opinion, that their report should be laid upon the table as
matter for future consideration, rather than immediate
action. " C. J. LONDOS, Chairman.

Feb. 11, 18,53."
On the motion of the right rev. prelate, the above report
was laid on the table.

The following petition was then read by the clerk :
" L-radon, Feb. 14, 1&53.
" My Lord Archbishop,—We the undersigned bishops of
certain colonial dioceses within your grace's province of
Canterbury, being in England at this particulartime, desire
respectfully to lay before your grace our views and wishes
upon matters of deep moment, not only to our respective
dioceses, but to the whole colonial church; aid therein, as
we humbly think, to the church of England herself. We
are deeply convinced that the present is a most critical
period in the history of the colonial churches. Though we
look with hope and confidence to the ultimate issue of the
present effort, in certain dioc:ses, to obtain relief
from the impediments which obstru:t the due and effec-
tive administration of their.ecelesiovical affairs, we are
nevertheless apprehensive that a ithout this counsel and co-
operation of the church at home in &gaunt- some plan fur
the common benefit and guielo of the c3rouial churches,
there will be imminent danger that different dioceses should
frame their constitutions according to such power as is, or
may be given them, upon principles which may teal to im-
pair the stability and integrity of the whole body of the
English church. We therefore respectfully entreat your
grace, at the approaching meeting of Convocation, to ap-
point a committee of bishops, and such others as your
grace may think fit, who mse, in the name and with the
authority of the church of England, give us the benefit of
their counsel on various important points and principles
' which we are most anxious to have settled in our respective
dioceses. In making this request to your grace, we would
not be understood in any way to express in this document
our own opinion as to oar right to sit in Convocation ; for
whether it be considered that we have the right or not, We
still think that it is highly expedient that the committee
for which we pray should be appointed. We venture the
mere earnestly to press this point upon the attention of
your grace at the present juncture, from the conviction
which we entertain that such an opportunity for the settle-
meat of the important questions now under consideration is
not likely to present itself again ; and further to
represent that questions of such vital importance cannot
remain any longer unsettled without serious detriment to
our church and holy religion. We deeply regret that in
consequence of the lamented illness of the Bishop of Syd-
ney we are unable to obtain the expression of his concur-
rence in the views herein expressed.
" G. P., Quebec.
" D. 0, Antigua.
" Cape Town."
- -

The Prolocutor of the lower house (Dr. Peacock, Dean of
Ely), here attended, in obedience to a summons from the
upper house, to receive the report of the committee upon
the eaforeing of better discipline among the clergy. Ile
WM accompanied by the Dean of Norwich, the Archdeacons
of Norwich and Winchester, Dr. Spry, and Dr. Words-
worth.

The following memorial was then received :
" To the Most Reverend the Archbishop and the Right
Reverend the Bishops of the Upper House of Convocation,
in the province of Canterbury now assembled,—Tne me-
morial of the Bishops of Quebec, Antigua, and Newfound-
land respectfully showeth, that your lordships (the memo-
rialists being now in England) have been made aware of
the question recently rais.:d respecting the right of colonial
bishops being within the metropolitan jurisdiction of the
See of Canterbury, to sit in the Convocation of the province
of Canterbury. That your memorialists are therefore
earnestly desirous of having their own position declared,
and their duty indicated in their behalf, by the decision of
your lordships, in order that they may guide and govern
themselves accordingly. "G. P., Quebec.
" D. G., Antigua.
" EDWARD, Newfoundland."
His Grace the ARCHBISHOP said he had taken the opi-
nion of the Vim-General (Dr. Twigs) upon the petition
of Robert, Lord Bishop of Cape Town, to be summoned to
the convocation of the prelates and clergy of the province
of Canterbury, and i: would now be road to their
lordships.
The Vicalt-On.,innAL then read an elaborate opinion,
which concluded in these terms :

" Upon the most careful consideration which I have been
able to bestow upon the facts submitted to your grace's
attention, I beg leave to report to your grace that the See
and diocese of Cape Town are not within and of the pro
vine* of Canterbury, so as to found any authority in your
grace to direct the Lord Bishop of Cape Town to bo cited to
appear at the Convocation of the Prelates and Clergy of the
Province of Canterbury now assembled, pursuant to her
Majesty's writ ; and that as the exercise of your grace's
authority as primate and metropolitan in assembling the
said convocation is strictly controlled by a statute of the
la realm, your grace may notlawfully accede to the prayer of
the petition of the said Lordßisbop of Cape Town, 'that you
will be pleased to direct a proper citation to be forthwith
isetied to him, or that he may be allowed without each
citation to take his rightful place as a suffragan bishop in
the present convocation.' "
The Bishop of LONDON said that, as dean of the province,
he had referred the matter to his chancellor, whose opinion
coincided with that of the Vicar-General ; and therefore he

did not feel justified in issuing the citation.
The Bishop of SALISBURY would like to know in what
form that opinion was before the house. It appeared to
him that it was for the bishops as a body to juage whether
or not the Bishop of Cape Town was entitled to a seat. He
did not wish to express any opinion on the matter, as it
obviously involved great difficulty.
The Bishop of LONDON thought the matter rested with
the archbishop, who was bound to carry out the Queen's
mandate. That house could not decide the legal point.
The Bishop of OXFORD thought the house was entitled
to entertain the question as one of privilege. It was a
question, not for his but for his grave's council. The
matter was one affecting their common rights, and the con-
sideration of it could not be set aside by the mere arbitrium
of the archbishop of the province.
The Bishop of WINCHESTER thought that in the first
instance the Bishop of CapeTovrn:should endeavour to esta-
blish his legal right to be cited by an appeal to the ordi-
nary courts of law.
The Bishop of LONDON begged it to be understood that
he expressed no opinion with regard to the legal question.
The Bishop of OITORD said a legal opinion had been
taken by the petitioner, and it was to the effect that the
Court of Queen's Bench would not entertain the question,
until admission had been relived by that house ; that court
always presuming that great officers would do their duty.
An inquiry must be established before the court would in-
terfere. _ _ _

The Bishop of Lottnox would ask the right rev. prelate
whether ho held that the upper house could admit any ono
to sit there as a bishop who had not first established his
right to do so.
The Bishop of OXPOID considered the house to be the
proper judge of its own privileges. If it pushed them too
far there would of course be legal address. Their position
was in this matter similar to that of the House of Lords.
The Bishop of LONDON quite agreed that that house was
in the first instance the judge of its own principles, but
there was a previous question, namely, of whom was that
house constituted. _

The Bishop of SLLIABURT said his grace had not pre-
viously held that this matter was under his own personal
jurisdiction; on the contrary, he allowed the petition to be
received and discussed, and then referred it to his vicar-
general for his opinion. Yet it was now intimated that the
matter was one with which the house had nothing what-
ever to do. . . _

His GRACE said he had certainly understood that this
was one of those cues which belonged to the president, and
upon which he had to give a judicial opinion ; and, not
wishing to pronounce without due consideration, he referred
the question to his official adviser, who had &elated against
the claim. The petition was • petition against the arch-
bishop for not having cited him, and his answer was that
ho ought not to be cited.
The Bishop of EXETER thought the wisest answer they
could give was, that they declined to decide the point,
leaving the petitioner to seek legal redress. It would not
be wise, he thought, to follow the analogy of the proceed-
ings of either house of parliament. That was the source of
all the unhappy differences which took place 160 years ago.
Prima facie his grace could hardly he presumed to have
the right cf deciding the question ; for from the earliest
times such questions had been brought before the whole
synod, aul nut hilt to tuns abauiute urhitriuin of the metr.;-
polite°.
The Bishop of Wontrivrit thought the hest course WIN
to order that the petition should he Lid or. the table.

At this stage of On psecteilings (it being half-past t 12)