The Sun.
London, England, 1866-06-20 00:00:00

THE sum, 1,0N1)0/N, WEDNESDAY EVEN

LAW INTELLIGENCE—This Day.
-0.

ROLLS COURT.
(Before Lord Romilly.)
THE CASE OE BISHOP COLENSO AND OTHERS.
The case of Dr. Colenso, Bishop of Natal, against the
Right Hon. W. E. Gladstone, M.P., Vice-Chancellor Wood,
Mr. Hubbard, M.P., and others, the treasurers and trus-
tees of the colonial bishoprics fund, was resumed this
morning. It will be remembered that the case for the
right rev. plaintiff was opened and concluded on a previous
day. The Rev. Canon Hawkins, D.D., who was formerly
secretary of the fund, and many other clergymen wore

present.
The Attorney-General appeared this morning on the
part of the defendants, the Master of the Rolls remarking
that he must regard liiin as Sir Roundel]. Palmer, and not
as Attorney-General, he being a party to the suit. After
some conversation on this point, in which several prece-
dents were cited, the learned gentleman was allowed to
proceed. He contended that as between the plaintiff and
the defendants personally there could be no personal con-
tracts, and said he understood that the plaintiff rested his
claim simply upon the fact that a certain sum of
money had been irrevocably supplied to the bishopric
of Natal, of which see the plaintiff had been in legal
possession since his consecration. If that case were made
out in all its parts, of course the plaintiff would be entitled
to his claims, but his (the Attorney-General's) case was
that no legal bishopric had ever been created in Natal
that no such diocese had ever been created in the sense of
the' information, and that no irrevocable appropriation of
the money for the purposes of the see had ever been made.
The funds out of whiclkmany of the Church bishops were
paid arose out of a letter written by the Bishop of London
to the Archbishop of Canterbury, and made public, as it
was, of course, intended to be. It was dated April 24, 1840,
and was the foundation of the whole scheme, which must,
therefore, be constructed to a great extent upon the terms
of that document. His lordship, in that letter, expresses
his desire that Church polity should be adoptedin various
colonies and dependencies of the British Crown, letters
patent being granted by the Crown as an essential part of
the scheme, in order that it might have legal effect. It was
the Church of England which was to send the mis-
sions to those countries, and the Church, as it
had been founded in the East and West Indies,
was cited as the basis on which everything should be done.
Accordingly, in 1811, a meeting was held, at which reso-
lutions were pasged providing for the establishment of a
fund, having for its object the planting of the Church at
various places under the systematic and authoritative
superintendence of bishops of the national church, whose
system, character, and doctrine were to be carried into
these colonies and other places. They were then to be
essentially legal bishoprics under the Crown of England.
That such were the views of those who liberally contri-
buted to the fund was evident from the letter which had
been written by Miss Burdett Coutts, although, of course,
the letter could have no legal bearing on the present case.
It had bean said that no legal jurisdiction could have
been given to the proposed bishopric which at that time it
was proposed to establish at Valetta. His learned friend
(Mr. James), who used that argument, seemed to have
forgotten that an act had been passed previously—the
Jerusalem Bishopric Act—for the express purpose of
g!ving such jurisdiction.
Mr. James said ho rather thought the Attorney-General
would find that that Act was passed contemporaneously.
The Attorney-General said, on referring to the Act, he
found that it was passed contemporaneously, and would
thus so far help out his argument—Parliament having
given to the Crown power to grant spiritual jurisdiction.
Mr. James said the Bishop of Jerusalem could not hold
his Episcopal Court under that act.
The Attorney-General said that although that might be
so, it would not in any way affect the present case. He
contended that every clergyman under such an arrange-
ment was liable to the jurisdiction of the Bishop, although
the laity might not be so, any more, indeed, than they
were at home in England, where the laws did not bind
the clergy to obedience to the laws of the Church, inasmuch
as any layman who was indisposed to obey the laws of the
Church might, if he pleased, dissent from it.
The Attorney-General proceeded to argue at great
length on the nature of the constitutions of Cape Town
and Natal, arguing that when Dr. Gia,y resigned the
bishopric of Cape Town, for the purpose of obtaining new
letters patent and to subdivide the diocese, he did not in
any way affect the bishopric, which remained in force not-
withstanding that temporary resignation. He argued that
it was doubtful whether the Crown had a right to sub-
divide the diocese of Cape Town as it did ; and that, con-
sequently, upon that ground the plaintiff might not be
entitled to the claim he at present made. He then dwelt
minutely upon the events of 1853, when Bishop Gray
sought to be relieved from a portion of his large diocese,
and to have new dioceses in South Africa erected. Re-
ferring to the letter which at that time Bishop Gray wrote
to Mr. Hawkins, the secretary of the Colonial Bishops'
Fund, he said that much had been made of a remark in it,
that the Queen's letters patent were worth little more than
waste paper.
The Master of the Rolls said that little importance was
to bo attached to casual expressions of that kind. The
bishop was merely urging the kupm tanoo of making bettor
provision for his diocese.
In answer to the Judge, the Attorney-General said his
contention was that Bishop Colenso was merely a titular
Bishop of the Church of England, and that no diocese had
been erected in Natal.
The Master of the Rolls—Ho has a cathedral and a
palace, has he not ?
The Attorney-General said that was irrelevant.
The Master of the Rolls said all ho understood the
Judicial Committee to have decided was that the Bishop of
Cape Town had no compulsory jurisdiction of the Bishop
of Natal.
The Attorney• General held that the Judicial Committee
decided that the Queen had jurisdictioq over Dr. Gray and
Dr. Colenso, as titular bishops of the Church of England,
but that in the Cape colony the Queen's letters patent were
absolutely worthless.
The arguments are likely to last some days.

" In consequence of the Fenian disturbances in Ireland,
together With the money panic, I have been unable to ob-
tain the purchase money from a company formed and
registered for the purchase and working of my interest in
a valuable slate quarry in Ireland, which I had ar-
ranged to sell to them, and the expenses incident thereto:,
The accounts filed show--Debts, £7,610, the greater part
of which is said to have been incurred in forming the
company. The assets, which may prove to be considerable,
depend on the amount to be recovered from the company.
The principal creditors are the Universal Insurance Com-
pany, who claim £l,OOO, and the Naval and Military In-
surance Company, who claim £5OO. The assignees chosen
were Mr. H. S. Melon, gentleman, of Piccadilly, and Mr.
Dubois, of the City. The next sitting is appointed for
July 20th.

POLICE JNTELLIGENCE.—This Day

- -..--
MANSION-11017SE.

Lewis Schonfield, a poor miserable-looking young man,
appeared to a summons taken out by his master, Mr.
Lloyd, packing• case maker, of Bush-lane, City, charging
him with absenting himself from work without permission.
Mr. Lloyd said the. defendant was under a stamped
agreement to work for him for a term of three years, and
for the last week or two he had absented himself without

leave.
The Lord Mayor (to defendant)—What have you to say
to this. You render yourself liablo to imprisonment for
not working for your master.
Defendant—l would work for him, your lordship, but I
can't live upon what I get for it from Mr. Lloyd. I hope
your lordship will, if you can, kindly cancel the agreement.
The Lord Alayor—l can't do that. What do you give
him a week, Mr. Lloyd ?
_ _ _ _

Mr. Lloyd—The agreement says he is to have 10s.
a week, but if he likes to work industriously he can earn
morn than that.

puDt emfoenocinanptie—cel
work can't,. your worship. Mr. Lloycl has now

Mr. Lloyd—lt was at his own request.
Defendant—Yes, because I thought I could earn more
at it, but I can't. I have to earn 225. before I even get the
10s. Mr. Lloyd has broke the agreement, and I hope my
lord you will cancel it. He told me I could earn from
20s. to 28s. a week for myself after he had taken his 12s.
out of my earnings, but I can't. I can't live on the money
I get from Mr. Lloyd. My wages have not averaged 9s.
a week. lam 22 years of age, I can't live on that. lem
perfect in my trade. lam willing to - Work-if I can get
enough only to keep me.
The Lord Mayor—You seem Mr. Lloyd to make a profit
Out of the labour of these lads ; can't you cancel the en-
gagement of the defendant ?
Mr. Lloyd—lf I was to do that I should have all the
other lads at the shop doing the same thing. What's the
use of having apprentices if you do not have some advan-
tage? You might as well have journeymen at once. The
defendant can earn 255. to 30s. a week if ho likes.
The Lord Mayor—But then you deduct 12s. a week from
it. What hours would the defendant have to work to earn
that ?

Mr. Lloyd—From 6in the morning to Bat night. He
can earn good wages if he likes.
Defendant—Look at me, my lord, I haven't a
shoe to my foot, and I'm in rags. I have worked
as hard as any man can, and while I've been
with Mr. Lloyd I've never got more than
about 9s. a week. Or one occasion I recoiled I got 17s. 3d.,
but I had to work a week, and nearly a half of the next for
it. Do cancel the agreement, my lord—l don't wish to do
anything wrong. I have had to beg bread and butter from
the men in the shop to keep up my strength to do my
work. I don't think that looks as if I was unwilling.
Mr. royd—He can earn good wages if he likes.
Defendant I can't, after you take your 125., work as
hard as I may. I never hare more than 9s. for myself. I
can't get the necessaries of life with that.
The Lord Mayor—l don't wish to send the poor fellow
to prison, and I cannot cancel the engagement. Come,
Mr. Lloyd. can't you make it a little easier for him. Ile
seems a willing hand.

Mr. Lloyd—Well, I'll say I'll only take 10s. out of his

earnings.
The Lord Mayor—Say Bs., to oblige me.
Mr. Lloyd—Very well, my lord.

Defendant—Thankye, my lord, for your kindness.
The Lord Mayor—Now, you go home, work with a
willing heart, and no doubt you and your master will get
on better.

MARLBOROUGH-STREET.
ENDANGERING LIVES IN THE STREETS.—A GENTLEMAN
INJURED THROUGH A DRUNKEN DRlVER.—llenry Darling,
a carman, living at 23, Denmark-street, Bloomsbury, and
Josoph Walker, of 24, Deau-street, butcher, were charged
before Mr. Tyrwhitt with being drunk and furiously driv-
ing a horse and vau in Regent-street; and John Osborne,
of 26, Bodfordbury, butcher, and Edward Bazley, 7, New-
port-market, smith, wore charged with being drunk and
incapable.

Mead, 126 C, said that on the previous evening, about
7 o'clock, he was coming down Regent- street, and saw
Darling driving a glass van at a furious rate, Osborno and
Bazley, who wore both drunk, lying on the top. In con-
sequence of a gentlemax coming up and telltus
Darling had driven over a gentleman, ho went after
the van and stopped it. Darling then went back with 214
C to a doctor inVigo-street, where the gentleman was taken.
Osborne got down and tried to make off, but he secured
him and gave the van over to a boy to join him at the sta-
tion. Walker then went up to the boy and took the van
from him and drove off.

In answer to Mr. Tyrwhitt, the constable said the gen-
tleman who wont home was not in attendance. Ho was
going at the rate of 10 or 11 miles an hour. There were a
number of carriages about at the time, and if he had not
stopped it, it would have gone into a carriage near Mr.
Dolby's. He saw Darling strike the horse with the reins-
Walker also drove the horse as fast as he could.

Woolway, 214 C, proved taking Darling back to the
doctor's shop in Vigo-street, where the injured gentleman
was taken, and afterwards to the station. The gentleman,
who he believed was not seriously injured, was after-
wards put in a cab and taken home, and would attend if
necessary.

Darling said the horse started off through the reins
ouching it.

Walker said that seeing tho horse in charge of a boy and
not the police, he thought ho would drive it home as he
knew Darling.

Mr. Tyrwhitt said ho thought the locking up Bazloy had
undergone sufficient for him, and ho would discharge him.
Osborne would have to pay a fine of 55., as ho had been a
little disorderly. Walker would be fined 40s. or a month
for driving cif with the van at a fast rate, endangering
life. 'He would never pass over any case of the kind in
future. Darling would be remanded on two bail of £2O
each to see whether the injured person was seriously hurt,
for if he was ha would send the case to the Sessions.