The Sun.
London, England, 1853-04-18 00:00:00

LITERATURE.

The Diary and Houres of the Ladye Adolie. Edited,
by Lady Charlotte Pepys. Addey and Co.
This is another of those volumes which have
lately been published in the old style and ortho-
graphy, such as the " Life of Mary Powell," dic.
The present work commemorates the life and death
of " a faythfulle childe," three centuries ago. In
the days of
Queen Mary she suffered martyr-
dom for her faith. The diary is very interest-
ing, and the collection of " Houres" at the con-
clusion is curious and instructive. It consists of
prayers and meditations, carefully arranged. The
Ladye Adolie and her friend Una having disputed.
respecting the colour of a fish, Una falls into the
water in her attempts to secure it. She is wits
difficulty recovered, and Adolie, on moving her
kirtle, finds the fish entangled in its folds.

"1 putte it into fresh soft —water and it did begin to
revive ; I did carry it to the light to see it better, aria
the Evening Sun just sinking gave it a golden hue on
one side, but left it brown on the other.

" Ah, Chaucer / Chaucer / we, too, had been like unto
thy Knightes of the Gold and Silver Shield.
" We had meant the same fishe ; but Una, down on
the banks, cast it into shade, while I, standing, had seen
the other side lit up. This was poor Una's fishe.
" She was still sleepinge, and I still on the watche be.
side her, when sleepe came over mee too, and I dreamed.
I did dreme that there were manie men trying to catch
fishe, for they were starving ; and there were manie fishe
of divers sortes in the deep waters. But as soon
as their nets caught anie, one man did call this a
poisonous sorte, and another did call others bad and un-
eateable, so that with one and another assurance all
were rejected. Then I wepte, and said, What will ye
then do ?' Then I heard a voice say, 'Have ye any
meate ?' and they made replie Nay.' Then, said the
voice, Come and dine.' And we saw one who from His
hande did give us some of all kindes of fishes to eate,
and they were verie goode.
" And He vanished out of oure sighte. Then these
men fell to discoursing wherefore all were goode from his
hande ? and, once more beside the waters, did dispute
eagerlie which were of the sorte that He had taken and
given unto us. Then saide It was not the sorte
but because they were in His hande.' Whereat all did
turne and looke angrilie upon mee and fright mee, and
drive me sear the waters, so that I cried out for team
And methoughte one caught me to His bosom, and th•
same blessed voice sayde, Faythefulle witnesse ! none
shall pluck thee out of my hande,' whereat I trembled
with exceeding joy and I awaked."
This dream was illustrative of Adolies's fate.
The typo and binding are characteristic of the
time of the narrative, and combined with its
peculiar orthography, render the illusion com-
plete, and were it not for the freshness of the
paper and colouring, we might fancy it had
emerged from some ancient library to give the
modern readers " a glimpse of the days that are
over."

The Diary of Martha Bethune Baliol. Chapman
and Hall.
This is the Chronicle of an eventful year, from
1753 to 1754. It is supposed to be written by a
young lady of the Baliol family, the sister of Sir
Richard Baliol, and the granddaughter of Lady
Bethune, of Lincluden. It is written in a very
impressive manner, and cannot fail to attract in-
terest of the deepest kind. The hero is the young
Earl of Derwentwater, the son of the unfortunate
earl who was executed in the civil wars. The
ill-
fated Martha was engaged to him, and they
were forming plans for their future lives
abroad, as he could only remain in Scotland
in disguise, when a party of soldiers came to
search the house. By a miracle the Earl escaped,
but alone, and before Martha could rejoin him in
France he had engaged in the war at Hanover,
and the awful news came that " the young Earl
had given his soul up to Heaven, still fresh with
the brightness of youth." He died on the field of
Hastenbec. His end is thus described :—" When
the battle was over, and the day ours, we thought
the victory dearly purchased when we saw our
young Colonel's place empty. We found his body
lying in the midst of the slain at the battery which
he had so bravely carried, which he was the first to
mount, and where he had been cut down. He
was quite dead, and his sword broken in his hand,
but he held it so tight that I could not unclasp it,
and so wo buried him, the broken sword in his
hand. .

Australia Visited and Revisited. By Samuel Moss-
man and Thomas Bannister. Addey and Co.
Among the numerous works of every description
recently published on this universally attractive
subject, this volume presents at least the novelty
of a double authorship. It is a narrative of " Recent
Travels and old Experiences in Victoria and New
South Wales." It is justly observed in the preface
that nothing likely to mislead should be stated at
any time by travellers, but at the present period accu-
racy is especially important, as from the vast number
emigrating misinformation is peculiarly prejudicial.
The authors therefore have given us simply a nar-
rative of facts, and present a picture of the colonies
as they actually are under the influence of the gold
mania. The details of ordinary life, and the ad-
vice to emigrants, are the result of long experience
as settlers and otherwise. An extensive map is given
of New South Wales, and a chart of the world, by
A. K. Johnston, geographer to her Majesty.

Elf---- Tamheiesshonip,
sailed -
William
stAer,prCaptain
to day forZAdelaide, South Australia, taking 257
emigrants, equal to 198 statute adults, from the Govern.
ment depot here. The William Stewart, at the IGRASLIOwNa.r----4 SSO7UOTE tifflir register,
re-
quest of the General Post-office authorities, has had
placed on board of her the 39 bags of mails brought
home from the Orestes, which vessel put into Lisbon
leaky on the sth inst., and, in consequence of exten-
sive repairs being required before she could proceed
the voyage, the mails were returned in the Pen' loan
and Oriental Company's ship Iberia.
The
mailnsu r
originally made up for the unfortunate Royals vMail
steamer Australian, and it is to ho sent effort to cony ped that the pre-
ey them to their destination will be
more successful than the four previous attempts to dis-
patch them have been. With reference to the emi-
grant ship Orestes (now in
that this ship was not sent out by the Peninsular
and Oriental Steam Company. She was purchased
by that association, deliverable in Adelaide, and the
company had nothing whatever to do with the outfit
or dispatch of the ship, or with her cargo or passer'.
gers. All this was as much in the hands of the owners
as if the company had never looked at her. A minute
survey of the vessel showed that she would be well
adapted for the company's purpose,—viz., a coal-hulk
and store-ship at Adelaide ' • and they therefore made ar-
rangements that she should become their property on the
completion of the voyage out. This explanation is ne-
cessary to exonerate the Peninsular and Oriental Com-
pany from any responsibility that may arise out of the
occurrenne. The ship Moultan, 611 tons burden (Cap-
tain Chivers), will leave on Tuesday or Wednesday for
Geelong, with a full complement of emigrants.r
.The
Elizabeth, 569 tons, sailed on Wednesday 1
foras last
Adelaide
Mel-
bourne. The Calabar, 754 tons,
willleave Kennaway in
about the end of the month, and the Lady
Southampton Emi-
gration
The
the beginning of May. Port of Sou,
to dipatch the Gipsy, Company are about of
650 tons, for Adelaide, and the Leonidas, of 1,000 tons,
will
and Sydney. Both these vessels
for Port Philip
6 ' take their departure in May

CHURCH GOVERNMENT IN NEW ZEALAND.

the funds raised
average income
clergy, which
. mnufs2tfinolo.
s and other Church
for church building, education,
wa-aymeaolu.,natnatoifalt laedasdt I,tOo, have an
income of the American Church at half a m
10s a-head for the mem-
berspurposes, I am sure I shall be within the markm iaftelrlisnegt tahne.
ninny, that is, speaking roughly, .f
fact, we do not want money,' says have
funds
want men for the ministry.' This the na-
tural
of her communion, or 2/. 10s. for
hevisetrynrinam,i.lwy
funds enough ; we
her members ipantretriecsitpawthininchinis
tehnegmaendneaigvedinaemnotnngf
result ofbtyheanze
her affairs. In every departmentaaletainvde
of her proceedings the advan-
tages of her system are visible. When an extension of the epis-
copate_d, she is not obliged to go, like some other
is require
people
I have heard of, to a heterogeneous Legislature com-
posed of men of every religion or of no religion, nor to a co-
lonial
minister, who may be her bitter enemy, in order to ask
leave to consecrate a bishop, and to discuss the boundaries of
the diocese, and the amount of the endowment. The Ame-
rican Church settles that for herself, as every Church
ought. -But I need not expatiate longer on these advan-
tages of system and organisation which the American Church
enjoys. I have been induced to say thus much on her
constitution and progress, because, as presenting the only
instance of an ecclesiastical body in communion of the
Church of England, which possesses a regularly consti-
tuted representative government, she affords the only avail-
able precedent far her own case, and also because the signal
success which has attended a career begun under such dis-
couraging circumstances, seems to show that, in order to
fulfil her mission, the Church of England does not require
endowments or State connection ; she only wants to have her
hands untied—a clear stage, and no favour. Of course Ido
not suppose that self-government is the only cause of the
success of the American Church, but it does appear not only
to be remarkably coincident with that success, but to consti-
tute almost the only material difference between her position
and that of the Colonial Churches which are so far behind her
in available life and energy. I will next notice one or two of
the objections commonly made to a representative government
for the Church, for I need hardly say that the form of govern-
ment we wish to obtain involves tho representative principle
It is said that it would encourage factions, debatings, and
party contests. I will not insist on the argument that a si-
milar objection would lie against all representative Govern-
ment, civil as well as ecclesiastical—l would rather point to
the American Church, and ask whether such an effect has
been produced there. Of course I don't mean to say that
there has been no party feeling on church
it led mattersito
Americain
n
—I only say it has not been so strong, nor hassuch
evil results, as in England ; and that there, as elsewhere, in
but the cure of faction. Again, it may be
been, not the cause,
the Church as in the State, free and regular institutions have
said that self-government will lead to rash and heterodox altera-
tions in the formularies of worship, and in the discipline of
the Church ; and here I must not be misunderstood : I would
certainly claim, on the part of the New Zealand Church, the
over
formularies. While it is necessary and right that the formu-
laries right of managing to the fullest extent its own affairs, includ-
ing of the control course the regulation of worship, and
of the Church of England should be the basis of union
among those who combine to form a constitution for a Colo-
nial Church, I must say that, after it is formed, I think it
would be unworthy of our position as a National Church to
bind ourselves to these formularies for ever. Why should we
not have the same right of revising from time to time our
liturgies and articles to suit our circumstances which every
National Church, and which the Church of England herself,
has repeatedly claimed and exercised ? Are we afraid we
shall exercise that natural and obvious right badly ? It is
possible we may; but I am quite sure, if we are inclined to
do so, no paper restriction will prevent us, nor is it advisable
that it should; if bishops, clergy, and laity, should at any
time wish for alterations, I really see no good in trying to
make them use forms which they would on the hypothesis
disapprove of. But having said thus much on the abstract
right to effect changes, I point to the American Church as
my ground for anticipating that they will not be effectual, at
least not to any injurious extent. There was everything in
the circumstances of the American Church and people to
make wide deviations on their part from the English
ritual a priori probable ; yet it is well known that the devia-
tions actually made are altogether unimportant, both in num-
ber and character ; nay it is remarkable, and forms a remark-
able testimony in favour of our formularies, that in several
instances where alteratjous have been actually made, the
Church has subsequently returned, after experience of the
change, to the more ancient usage. The last, and by far
the strongest objection to representative Government
which I shall consider, is founded on the difficulty of settling
how the lay element in the proposed governing body shall be
constituted ; in other words, who shall possess the Church
franchise. This difficulty is undoubtedly a formidable one ;
indeed it is hardly susceptible of a perfectly satisfactory solu-
tion ; for in whichever way it be settled by \any particular
class of persons, it is always open to another class to ask them
who gave you authority to settle it. But this is not properly
an objection, it is only a difficulty, and difficulties are made
to be overcome. Although we may never arrive at the solu-
tion of the question which shall be logically satisfactory, we
may get in a rough and approximate way at a settlement of it
which will be sufficient for all practical purposes, For exam-
ple, a plan might be proposed by the highest authority in our
church, the bishop, or bishops, involving a settlement of the
franchise question, and if that plan were accepted by the clergy,
and the great body of those who call themselves churchmen,
it will probably be thought that as near an approximation
to the desideratum of a general assent as is necessary for
practical purposes would be arrived at. For my own part, I
am very anxious to have this question raised ; and though it
is not strictly relevant to the matter in hand, and the discus-
sion of it may appear premature, I will ask your indulgence
while I say a few words about it. After much and anxious
reflection, I can see no proper qualification for a Church fran-
chise but that of full communion ; and I say this quite irre-
spectively of any doctrinal opinion about the nature and ef-
fects of that Holy Sacrament ; I say it because this qualifica-
tion, or something strictly equivalent to it, is in consonance
with invariable usage in the ancient Church, and also indeed
in every Christian denomination, except our own, of which I
ever heard; I say so, moreover, because we can have
otherwise absolutely no guarantee that those who as-
sume to legislate for the Church are even nominally
Churchmen, still less that they observe those laws an ob-
servance of which all her members admit to be of the very
essence of Churchmanship, and while I entertain what many
would consider very democratic views about the participation
of the laity in Church government, it is a sine qua non with
me that they should be Church laity. Now, it seems a con-
tradiction in terms to say that a man is in communion with
the Church who never communicates. The very word com-
munion, as applied indiscriminately to Christian fellowship,
and to a participation in the Lord's Supper, proves that the
two ideas are, in the minds of Christians, indentical. In-
deed, I may be wrong, but I cannot help thinking that those
who hold a different view in this matter either have hardly,
thought out the question, orare mainly actuated by what I con-
ceive to be a mistaken view of expediency. Some of them fear
that non-communicants would be offended; but I must say I
think a man who deliberately and habitually abstains from com-
nion with the Church, is not one to whose opinions and feelings
Church rules should be made subordinate. Others fear that
a communicant's franchise might lead to a profanation of the
Sacrament. Have they inquired whether in other religious
denominations, where conformity to religious ordinances is
invariably required, as a qualification for Church govern-
ment, any such profanatory effect is experienced or even sus-
pected. The fact is, it would really not be worth a man's
while, for the sake of so small an inducement, to be habitually
guilty of so great a crime. But even if it were found, as is
just possible, that such a rule might aggravate the guilt
of a few abandoned individuals, ought we to place their
supposed spiritual interests in competition with the wel-
fare of the whole Church ? Others, perhaps, have heard the
maxim, that taxation involves representation, and think ac-
cordingly that every man who pays money for Church purposes
has a right to participate in Church Government. Have they
considered how far this abstract proposition would lead them ?
Certain it is that no political or religious community in the
world even admitted or acted on such a principle. No mat-
ter how far a nation may go in the direction of universal suf-
frage, it always stops short of making contribution to its re-
venue the sole qualification for political power. Women,
children, idiots, convicts, alieas, may and generally do con-
tribute to revenue, but they never enjoy its supposed correla-
tive—power. Go and subscribe to a Wesleyan meeting-house
or a Presbyterian church, and see whether your doing so will
get you a vote for members of the next conference or the next
assembly. You may reasonably make pecuniary contribution
one qualification, but I cannot even conceive a pro-
posal deliberately made that it should be the only one.
On the other hand, I hardly think any one will propose as a
permanent qualification for Church government a simple
statement of Church membership. This again would be quite
unheard of ; no religious or political privilege was ever yet
granted on the mere condition that a person claimed it, for it
comes to that ; there is always required some test of his sin-
cerity—something that involves a question of fact upon
which the claimant may be objected to, if he be not telling
the truth. There remains therefore only the alternative of
a double franchise, i. e., a statement of Church membership
combined with a payment ; and this is the franchise
which has been apparently proposed for adoption in
Wellington, and it may be said in South Australia also,
for scat-renting involves in some degree a profession of
Churchmanship as well as a money payment. To this rule
I object, in the first place, that it does not secure the real
churchmanship of the governing body, and, in the second, that
pecuniary payment ought not to be mixed up with Church
franchises at all. Wherever it is adopted, the best Churchmen
may be excluded because poor, while persons who are notori-
ously not Churchmen will have votes in Church matters, and
assist in making Church laws. On the whole, therefore, it
does appear to me that no good reason can be assigned why
the Church of England should adopt a more lax rule with re-
spect to its franchises than any other ecclesiastical body. I
trust you will pardon me for this digression, if it be one, and
for having intruded my own view of this subject on you at
so much length. My object in doing so is not to pro-
cure any expression of opinion on it, still less the
adoption of any practical step by the meeting, but
merely to bring it before the mind or the public, in the sure
hope that by full consideration and-free discussion the objects
which we have all at heart will be best promoted. It will
perhaps be expected that I should say a few words as.to the
relation which the proposed body would bear to the Canter-
buryt
ethnatt managementfi of rat
bheoda s;: ;sfbo ec itsi
cant:
vinonsnt
utt oun t
edmacai khen
Association. My own view is this. It is perfectly
whicht alphaveprovisiona i
sligpleaseshtest
g ht
t dfeonarn competent
et°
repre-
sent the Church in this settlement, the association will, as a
matter of course, hand over to it the
management of its eccle-
siastical fund. I will conclude by saying that the practical
step we propose to the meeting is merely to elect a corresponding
committee, and to ascertain from the bishop, and the church-
men of other settlements, *what it is that they are going to do.
Whether it will be our business afterwards to gom ore into
the details of a plan or whether the bishop will be pleased to
draw out a plan, and invite our co-operation in it—whether
we shall begin by petitioning Parliament, or, as I should much
prefer, the Colonial Legislature, to make us a corporation, or
whether, like the people of South Australia, we shall endeavour
to organise ourselves, and go on temporarily without being le-
gally incorporated, will depend on the nature of the answer
we receive. I only trust ttiat now, having begun, we shall
not let the matter drop; I trust we shall ace that if
our Churchmanship be not a sham, if we really take any in-
terest in our Church, if we care as much about it as we should
do about a joint-stock company in which we had invested
fifty pounds, we shall do with respect to it what as men of
business we should do as a matter of course in a worldly case
—we shall claim for the ecclesiastical society to which we be-
long a constitution and a government-
_
RET'

The Lyttelton Times (which arrives very
20, last
and with great gaps in the dates) of March
meetingsy at
contains a very important and interesting
Christ Church, on the subject of Church governthmeentin
New Zealand. The most important feature inh .
meet-
ing was a speech from Mr. J.
one may
pro-
posing the first resolution, spokeß .asGfoodllloe.wy'swe—o,
whichin "
The resolution which I haveTh
be said to express a truism. etoCtruorchsem' is
aNew Zealand, as
eefisnseitentaimiptonncipained,
the very
altds
elsewhere, is a society having
practical ends to accomplish.condition of its existence,sive Church its work. Toeemka.s almost m
an absurdity,y mind, the notion
of an inactive or passive
Indeed, what I say of a Church, applies more or. less
eteoeleevsleasry.
associated body. When men form or join a society,..
tical or secular, this idea .is almost necessarily involved of
their doing something in combination which as individuals
they
they could not or would not do ; otherwise,
combine ? But a society in order to work must have should
esan
or-
ganisation and a government ; it must have forms, laws,
qua-
lifications, executive instruments ; it must head and
hands. Accordingly, every association of.t meonv,efruormaenuyt
;puorn-
pose whatever, begins by constituting i g
however small or humble may be its scalesoaseniedtyit,soorbajeepot,liwtiheea-1
whe-
ther it be a penny club, or a building
union, or a religious sect, as a ma.dtteeurt,oforcoitusrsseyuitodap, poorinwtshat
Managing committee, or its e
everelse it may please to call gsrrolaselugisitlaatuitvseaaundd
speaks, and
organ.
Through Through the medium of this o
' Therefore I call it a truism to say that
its business • without this organ it would be an unmeaning.and
objectless list of names.
'
it 'is exceedingly desirable for the Church of England in New
Zealand to have a form of government. The wonder is, indeed,
that at this stage of our ecclesiastical existence we should have
to enunciate so self-evident a proposition. Yet so it is ; this
is not merely ignored ; it is actually disputed. While,
so
truismfar
as I can recollect, there is not in the world another in-
stance of a society without a government, to many English.
men it appears right and proper that such should be the
normal state of their Church. If you go to the shareholder
in a joint-stock bank, or of a railway company, or to a Wes-
leyan or Presbyterian, and ask him how the society he belongs
to is governed, that is to say, who makes and who executes
its laws, not one of them would be for a moment at a loss for
an answer ; he could inform you with respect to its organisa-
tion as easily as he could with respect to its character and
object. But if you go to a member of the Church of England
and ask him the same simple question, what answer can he
give ? Is there any one here present who can tell me how
the laws of the English Church are made, who speaks our
collective voice, who does what we have as a corporation to
do---in a word, who manages our affairs I One may refer me
to certain laws made in the year 1603 for the government of
the Church, and may reply to me by describing the judicial
Machinery provided for the execution of them ; another may
'tell me that Parliament governs the Church ; another that
the Queen ; another that the Bishops govern it. And in each 1
of these answers there would be a certain amount of apparent
truth. The canons are nominally the statute-book of the
English Church; Parliament does occasionally legislate in
matters ecclesiastical ; the Queen is, in theory her executive
head ; the bishops exercise after a fashion certain govern-
mental functions in their respective dioceses.
.ts But still
the question, ' Who governs us?' taken in
for the most pa
common-sense imeaning remains unanswerable. iThertcanons
are necessarily and properly, .
'ty could devise complicated rules
obso-
lete and unexecuted, as indeed it is absurd to suppose
that that any human author].
action for a society
whichwouldand
f
answer
t y its
ear purposeswlih o and a -
sup-
ply its needs for two hundred
tion and alteration. Parliamentary legislation in Church mat-
ters is a usurpation founded simply upon might ; the Queen's
authorityecclesiastical
is as purely nominal in as in civil
affairs
the bishops have no recognised collective authority at
all ; and in their respective dioceses exercise the simply minis-
terial office of carrying out the existing laws. No real govern-
mental power resides in any of these functionaries, because
a right to make laws is an essential attribute of a real govern-
ment ; and no existing authority has a right to make laws for
- the English Church. In considering this state of things, I
confess it seems to me to resist the conclusion that even the
endurance of it, implies, in a degree, paralysis; contentment
under it would imply the absence of life. A society that can-
not make a law for the regulation of its own affairs, or express
a corporate opinion, or do a corporate act, that is unable, in
short, to perform any of the functions of life, can only by a
great stretch of language be said to be a living body. What-
• ever may be the numbers and' energy of its individual mem-
bers, as a society, I say it is virtually dead. However, such
being the state of the Church of England, she has sent out
numerous bodies of offspring to all parts of the world ; I beg
your pardon ; she cannot send, because, as I have explained
to you, as a Church she cannot do anything : I should have
said numerous bodies of her offspring have gone out from
her, bearing with them the principles and traditions of
. their spiritual mother, and they have to adapt these as best
they can, to a new set of political and social circum-
stances. Amongst other things they have to see how they
can get on without government in a state of things which
urgently requires corporate action. The Colonial Church is
• cast on her own resources altogether; she has, generally
speaking, neither influence nor funds, nor consideration be-
queathed to her or provided for her ready made ; she must
• obtain them, as she can, by personal efforts, if I may use the
term. But personal efforts require, of course, a personal
agency; in order to collect funds, to build churches, to get
: and keep congregations, to exercise order and discipline
among them, and convert the heathen, a machinery is
wanted ; the old machinery, such as it is, is inapplicable or
inadequate, and there is no one with authority to create new.
The consequence is, that the Anglican communion almost in-
variably falls, at the commencement of a colony, below the
level of other denominations. Ido not recollect a single in-
. stance when, under such circumstances, she can be said to
have held her own. Other sects come out accustomed to self-
. organisation and self-government ; each branch is complete in
itself, prepared at all points ready for its work. Anglicans
alone, when removed from the sphere of their old associa-
tions, stand bewildered and apathetic, and unable to move or
act ; looking for help from Government or from the mother
country; from every quarter, in fact, but from themselves.
Though generally richer than other denominations, they can-
not or will not support their own ministers ; at least I
know that in those colonies with which alone I am
personally acquainted it is so. In British America, the
English people through the Society for the Propagation
of the Gospel and the Additional Bishoprics' Society,
and in New Zealand, the people of England through
the Church Missionary Society and Parliamentary grants,
almost exclusively support the clerical establishments
of communities (which are perfectly well able to do it for
themselves, and would be perfectly willing, too, if they were
not enervated by long disuse of the habit of acting for them-
selves in ecclesiasticaaffairs. At the same time it would be
only fair to say that the Church of England in the colonies is
far from being on a level with other sects as regards freedom
of action. Deprived as she is of the advantages resulting
(or supposed to result) from State connection, it is believed
(for such is the absurdity of the system that no one seems to
know exactly what its principles or practices are), but it is
believed that she still remains fettered by the liabilities which
were the incidents of her establishment in the mother country.
I will illustrate what I mean by an example which occurred
not long ago in this colony. A member of the Anglican
Church wished to marry a Jewess; the clergyman refused to
perform the marriage, and persisted In his refusal ; but the
Bishop told me he had been informed by the judge, that if
the parties applied for a mindamus to compel the clergyman
to marry them, he (the judge) would have felt it his duty to
grant it. ' I am not going to enlarge on the intolerable
• tyranny involved in the existence of such a state of things ; I
allude to it at present as showing the necessity not only for a
complete review of our ecclesiastical affairs, and for the estab-
lishment-of new and radically different principles of Church
organisation, but also, perhaps, for parliamentary assistance
in breaking our bonds. I have, now, sir, attempted to show
why in the words of the resolution which I am about to propose
it appears desirable theta form of government for the Church of
England in New Zealand should be established as soon as
possible. I have attempted to explain that, without it, she can-
not properly fulfil her most ordinary and necessary functions,
and that to the want of it is mainly to be attributed the
apathyand helplessness which arc such melancholy character-
istics of our Colonial Churches. I will next endeavour to
corroborate the view I have taken by quoting the example
set to us with respect to this matter by a sister church, which
found itself not vary long ago in circumstances analogous to
our own. I mean the Protestant Episcopal Church of America.
It is often said by enemies of the English Reformed Church
that she is the creature of the State, dependent on her estab-
lishment and her endowments for existence, and incapable of
standing like other ecclesiastical bodies, humanly speaking,
by her own strength, and working with her own means ; and
1 confess, if I were to look at the present state of our Colonial
Churches alone, I should find it difficult to rebut the sneer.
But I can show another side so the picture. When the United
States declared their independence, it may be said (humanly
speaking again) that the Church fell with the monarchy; epis-
copacy, especially in communion with the Church of England,
was, for obvious reasons, not only unfashionable, but
almost in
famous; the endowments of the church, which had been large
in.
some of the States, were taken away ; her edifices were de-
stroyed ; even her communion plate was sold ; numbers of
her clergy emigrated together with the most earnest members
of their flocks. In short, it is impossible to conceive a more
complete and overwhelming prostration than the American
Episcopal Church then suffered ; one would have said that
within the lifetime of a geueration, her existence in the United
States, like that of the British constitution on which she is
said to depend, would be a matter of history. Now let us look
at the sequel. For some little time the depression consequent
on the resolution continued, but the American Churchmen who
were left were not dismayed ; they had sense to see that new
measures were required to meet the emergency, and faith to
believe that they would be sufficient to meet it. Now, it is
instructive for us to remark that the first step they took,
when forced to shift for themselves, was the formation of a
governing body. The first general convention of the Ameri-
can Church met in 1785, only three years after the peace ;
the first American Bishop was consecrated in 1787. The
Church was organised with a rapidity and completeness emi-
nently characteristic of the administrative talents of the peo-
ple, the civil constitution of the Republic serving naturally
to a great extent as a model. A general convention was con-
stituted,. consisting of all the Bishops, and of clerical and lay
representatives from each diocese, and possessing full legisla-
tive powers for the whole Church. Diocesan conventions
'exercised similar powers within their respective jurisdictions.
Vestries administered parishes. -By degrees the outline thus
sketched was filled up ; canons of discipline were passed ; the
liturgy was revised ; provision was made for education, for
foreign missions, for domestic extension. Scattered and
helpless individuals became an animated, active, working
body, far inferior, indeed, to most of-the other denominations
in outward circumstances, but at least able for the first time
to do justice to itself and make free use of its own resources.
Before I describe the result of these measures, I must remind
you that the
America,
,wiath
Episcopalwith. It
Church had another disadvantage to
t is notorious that of the emigrants to
nally members of the E mall proportion are even norai-
e paratively s
English Church. The causes of this
are too obvious to regal; enumeration, and the fact is un-
forceddoubted. The Amercan°Episcopal Church, therefore, was
to rely largely upon
if it hoped to hold
Its own in numbers and influence to return to the
washis-
to afterbegin
itheja rme vy oo 1
grupet
ni tnoehnir
ase.
cid
number of Episco-
torical facts. I cannot find out whi.ti.:
ger faecnts as that the ascertainStatefiovfeNhielvt-eyanoorkel,yvfhie, n
psechanisocialeit•
2844, had 304 clergymen, had onl4.
lee °la6r parishes h e sal r•
am
11:::
pelled, therefore,
later date. In 1814, I find that the Episcopainfturirse,ei.
nhlaBt44:
bored 240 clergymen officiating in
ta
with URN or PARDONED CONVICTS .--The Falcon, brig,
the last year for which I have been able to proc
, 08n ptharedlo2ntehd
icnoantv,icftrsomonßeßrinoaurdd,a,awrrhiviceidl
lace
tacDs esphte-
tistics, it had 1,202. Assuming that its congregations he
Bmulti---- ford
left on the 17th ult. They were landed at the yard on
Dept-
plied in equal proportions, and there seems nor eason for
storekeeper of that
doubting it, we have here the fact that in thirty years the the following day, received the gratuities due to them
number of American Churchmen increased fivefold, or about from th twice as fast as the whole population of the Union. So that more storekeeper to enjoy the sweets establishmentof liberty,
which a n and
ioncet i
is
even if we allow for argument that immigration supplied to be ho
them proportioned to an extent proportioned to their ori- the phed they will now better a )re • t Several
ginal numbers, they must have more than doubled themselves life. Twom er appeared to have r2ilichecdia e. of
by conversions alone in thirty years. And that they have done of them also, si 1 the evening of
Too much cannot ngu ar to relate, were brothers.
t least seems to be shown by the fact, that in 1839 more , . be said in praise fth
so a •
balf of their clergy, and nearly one-half of their Bi- "em adopted by the Governme• o e excellent sys-
tem' one-
• of their wages until the ex • et of reserving a portion
shops, had been Presbyterians, Congregationalists, Methodists
ti .t
bl th
eists. I need not say that the proportion of converts. is r. Y, as it ena ea pira tion of their term of • the to. avoid the ‘343.
NE WSI lie ,3-1 have been larger among the congregations than
their
they would otherwise temptation to
be
se who rose to office and dignity in the Church. evil ways if turned aeeeee e exposed, to return to
!zee --- gets plenty of money. Her tam, n the wide world pen.
et American Church
( 1
:\,--. 15 ' 41.-t--:„,. •

NI S.

THE SUN, LONDON, MONDAY EVENING-, APRIL 18, 1853.

B A N

N S.

(Front the London Gazette of Tuesday.)

An Account, pursuant to the Act seventh and eighth
Victoria, cap. 32, of the Average Amount of Bank
Notes of the several Banks of Issue in England and
Wales, in Circulation during the Week ending Satur-
day, the 12th day of March, 1853: Average
PRIVATE BANKS. Amount.
Andover Bank, Andover—Heath and Co.
Ashford Bank, Ashford—Jemmitt and Pomfret 10,925
Aylsham Bank, Aylsham—G. and T. Copeman 4,249'
Aylesbury Old Bank, Aylesbury—Z. D. Hunt 24,985
Baldock Bank and Baldock and Biggleswade
Bank, Baldock—Wells, Hogge, and Co
Barnstaple Bank, Barnstaple—Marshall and CO
Basingstoke and Odiham Bank, Basingstoke—
Seymour, Lamb, and Co.
Bedford Bank, Bedford—T. Barnard and Sons
Bewdley Bank, Bewdley Nichols, Baker,
and Co
Bicester and Oxfordshire Bank and Oxford
Bank, Bicester— H. M. and G. Tubb
Birmingham Bank, Birmingham ---Attwoods,
Spooner, and Co
Birmingham and Warwickshire Bank, Bir-
mingham—J. L. Moilliet and Sons
Blandford Bank, Blandford—Oak and Co.
Boston Bank, Boston—Garfit and Co -
Boston Bank, Boston—H. and T. Gee and Co
Bridgwater Bank, Bridgwater—J. and J. L
Sealey
Bristol Bank, Bristol—Miles, Miles, and Co
Broseley and Bridgnorth and Bridgiaorth and
Broseley Bank, Broseley—Pritchards, Boy-
cott, and Co.
Buckingham Bank, Buckingham—Bartlett, Par-
rott, and Co.
Bury and Suffolk Bank, Sudbury Bank, and
Stowmarket Bank, Bury St. Edmunds—
Oakes, Bevan, and Co.
Banbury Bank, Banbury Gillet, Tawney,
and Co.
Banbury Old Bank, Banbury—Cobb and Son
Bath City Bank, Bath— G. Moger and Son
Bedfordshire Leighton Buzzard Bank, Leighton
Buzzard—Bassett, Grant, and Co
Birmingham Bank, Birmingham—Taylor and
Lloyds
Bradford Old Bank, Bradford, Yorkshire—H
A. and W. M. Harris and Co.
Brecon Old Bank, Brecon—Wilkins and Co
Brighton Union Bank, Brighton—Hall, West,
and Borrer
Burlington and Driffield Bank, Burlington—
Harding, Smith, and Co
Bury St. Edmunds Bank, Bury St. Edmunds—
J. Worlledge
Cambridge Bank, Cambridge—Mortlock & Co
Cambridge and Cambridgeshire Bank, Cam-
bridge—Messrs. Fosters
Canterbury Bank, Canterbury—Hammond and
Co
Carmarthen Bank, Carmarthen—David Morris
and Sons,
Chertsey Bank, Chertsey—La Coate and Son
Colchester Bank, Colchester—Round & Green
Colchester and Essex Bank, and Witham and
Essex Bank, and Hadleigh, Suffolk, Bank,
Colchester—Mills, Bawtree, and Co
Cornish Bank, Truro—Tweedy and Co
Coventry Bank, Coventry—Little & Woodcock
City Bank, Exeter—Milford and Co
Craven Bank, Settle—Alcocks, Birkbecks, and
Oo
Cardiff Bank, Cardiff—Towgood and Co
Chepstow Old Bank, Cheps.ow Bank, Mon-
mouth Old Bank, Monmouth Bank, Brecon
Bank, and Ross and Herefordshire Bank,
Chepstow—Bromage, Snea,d, and Co
Derby Bank, Derby—W. and S. Evans & Co
Derby Bank, Derby—Samuel Smith and Co
Derby Old Bank and Scarsdale and High Peak
Bank, Derby—Crompton, Newton, and Co
Devizes and Wiltshire Bank, Devizes—Locke
and Co
Diss Bank, Diss—Oakes, Fincham, and C 0...
Doncaster Bank and Retford Bank, Doncaster
—Cooke and Co
Darlington Bank, Durham Bank, and Stockton
on-Tees Bank, Darlington—Backhouse & Co
Devonport Bank, Devonport—Hodge and Co
Dorchester Old Bank and Dorsetshire Bank,
Dorchester—R. and H. Williams
East Cornwall Bank, Liskeard—Robins, Fos-
ter' and Co 101,964
East Riding Bank, Beverley—Bower and Co 49,601
Essex Bank and Bishop's Stortford Bank
Chelmsford—Sparrow, Round, and Co 43,975
Exeter Bank, Exeter—Sanders and Co 27,665
Fakenham Bank, Fakenham—Gurneys, Birk-
beck, and Co
Farringdon Bank and Bank of Wantage, Far-
ringdon—Barnes, Medley, and Co
Farnham Bank, Farnham—Messrs Knight
Faversham Bank, Faversham—Hilton and Co
Godalming Bank, Godalming—Mellersh and .
Keen
Guildford Bank, Guildford—Messrs. Haydon 8,119
Grantham Bank, Grantham—Hardy and Co 24,685
Hastings Old Bank, Hastings—Smith, Hilder,
and ao.
Hereford City and County. Bank, Hereford—.
Matthews and Co.
Hertford and Ware Bank, Hertford—S. Adams
and Co.
Hull Bank and Kingston-upon-Hull Bank,
Hull, Smith, Brothers, and Co.
Huntingdon Town and County Bank, Hunting-
don—Rust and Veaseys
Harwich Bank, Harwich—Cox, Cobbold, and
Co.
Hemel Hempstead Bank, Hemel Hempstead
---Smith and Whittingstall
Hertfordshire, Hitchin Bank, Hitchin
Sharpies, and Co.
Hereford, Ross and Archenfield Bank, and
Ross and Archenfield Bank, Hereford—
Morgan and Co
Ipswich Bank, Ipswich—Bacon and Co.
Ipswich and Needham Market Bank, Suffolk,
Hadleigh Bank, Manningtree and Mistley
Bank, and Woodbridge Bank, Ipswich—
Alexander!! and Co.
Kentish Bank, Maidstone—Mercer, Randall,

and Co.
Kington and Radnorshire Bank, Kington—
Davies and Co.
Knighton Bank, Knighton—Davies and Co
Knaresborough Old Bank and Ripon Old Bank,
Knaresborough—Terry and Co.
Kendal Bank, Kendal—Wakefield, Crewdson,
and Co.
Kettering Bank, Kettering—J. C. Gotch and
Sons
Lane End Staffordshire Bank, Lane End—C
Harvey and Son
Leeds Bank, Leeds—Beckett and Co.
Leeds Union Bank, Leeds—W. Williams,
Brown and Co.
Leicester Bank, Leices:,er—Pagets and Kirby,
Lewes Old Bank, Lewes—Molineux and Co
Lichfield Bank, Lichfield—Palmer and Greene
Lincoln Bank, Lincoln—Smith, Ellison, and Co.
Llandovery Bank, Lampeter Bank, and Llan-
ddo Bank, Llandovery—D. Jones and Co
Loughborough D.,nk, Loughborough—Middle-
ton and Cradock
Lymington Bank, Lymingion—St. Barbe and

24,273
9,889

15,788
35,125

10,970

13,878

23,459

10,288
7,170
56,620
13,238

5,046
31,775

16,305

22,04

70,344

34,083
24,632
3,178

34,81'

33,424

12,391
64,865

26,945

11,474

1,768
16,773

39,218

31,860

-Co. -
Lynn Regis and Lincolnshire Bank, Lynn
Regis—Gurneys and Co.
Lynn Regis and Norfolk Bank, Lynn Regis—
Jarvisand Co
Macclesfield Bank, Macclesfield—Brocklehurst

and Co. ..................... .........................
Manningtree Bank, Manningtree—Nunn and

Co.
Marlborough Bank, Marlborough and Wilts
Old Bank, Marlborough Old Bank, Marl-
borough Old Bank and Hungerford Bank,
and Hungerford Bank, Marlborough—Tan-
ner and Co
Merionethshire Bank, Dolgelly—Williams and
Son

Miners' Bank, Truro—Willyams and Co
Monmouthshire Agricultural and Commercial
Bank, Abergavenny—Bailey and Co
Monmouth Cid Bank, Monmouth Bank, Bre-
con Bank, Chepstow Bank, Chepstow Old
Bank, and Ross and Herefordshire Bank,
Monmouth—Bromage, Snead, and Co
Newark Bank, Newark—Godfrey and Riddell
Newark and Sleaford Bank, and Sleaford and
Newark Bank, Sleaford—Handley, Peacock,
and Co
Newbury Bank, Newbury—Bunny & Slocock
Newmarket Bank, Newmarket—Eaton, Ham-
mond, and Co
Norwich Crown Bank and No*rfolk and Suffolk

Bank, Norwich—Harveys and Hudsons
Norwich and Norfolk Bank, Norwich—Gur-
neys and Birkbeck
Nottingham and Nottinghamshire Bank, Not-
tingham, Hart, Fellows, and Co
Nuneaton Bank, Nuneaton—Craddock and Co
Naval Bank, Plymouth, Plymouth—Harris
and Co.
New Sarum Bank, Sarum—Everett and Co
Nottingham Bank, Nottingham—Samuel Smith

and Co.
Oswestry Bank and Oswestry Old Bank, Os-
westry—Croxon and Co.
Oxford Old Bank, Oxford—Robinson, Parsons,

and Co.
Old Bank, Tonbridge, Tonbridge and Ton-
bridge Wells Old Bank, Tonbridge and Ton-
bridge Wells and Sevenoaks Bank, Ton-
bridge—T. H. and S. Beeching
Oxfordshire Witney Bank, Witney—J. W

Clinch and Co.
Pease's Old Bank, Hull, the Hull Old Bank
and Beverley Bank, Hull—Pease and Co
Penzance Bank, Penzance--Batten and Co.
Peterborough Bank and Oundle Bank, Peter-
borough—D. Yorke and Co.
Pembrokeshire Bank, Haverfordwest—J. and

19,759
3,117
16,150

31,165
46,775
7,043
20,119

73,742

9,110
11,934
41,074

28,164

19,604

6,47

5,15

15,988

21,955

18,270

40,888

4,982

23,60:

35,315

21,088
20,389

59,233

13,936

26,364
8,995

19,685

42,392

8,571

5,291
55,601

36,842
25,429
30,483
11,390
82,116

14,426

6,953

3,906

31,411

11,355

14,265

2,633

1,713

6,370
14,193

28,679

12,911
25,520

46,604
21,452

16,623

45,842

62,086

9,825
3,524

25,828
12,478

27,832

11,018

33,829

8,092

10,795

37,857
11,158

7,343

W. Walters.. .................................
Reading Bank, Reading—Simonds and Co ,
Reading Bank, Reading—Stephens, Blandy,
and Co.
Richmond Bank, Richmond—Roper and Co
Rochdale Bank, Rochdale—Clement, Royds,
and Co.
Rochester, Chatham, and Strood Bank, Roches-
ter—Day and Nicholson...,,. 7,221
Royston Bank, Royston—Fordham and Sons 11,220
Rugby Bank, Rugby—A. Butlin and Son 10,318
Rye Bank, Rye—R, C. Pomfret and Co.

10,447
27,706

31,934
5,G14

4,321