The Sun.
London, England, 1850-06-04 00:00:00

JUNE 4,

the sa'Tel deposit of his dot::rine, would guide and
govern their decision.

1 The l'st trquis of LANSDOWNE said that he thought
it but fitting that he should take the earliest opportuni.y
of explatniee the views he entertained, in common wilts
her Majesty's Government, with respect to this most im
portant, he might almost say perilous, Bill. In making
the statement of his views on the subject ho was con-
scious not only of the disadvantage under which he la-
boured in attempting to follew the Right Rev. Prelate,
Iwho spoke with authority on any subject, hut more
especially upon that to which he had given so much con-
sideratioe, but also of the great disadvantage of being
corneslled to de se in the ebsence of his Noble and
Learned Friend whore he might still call his esteemed and
revered colleague, who had for yesrs sat ups in the wool-
sack, and a he, had he been there that day, would, with
his usual power and ability, have stated the objections
which he (the Marquis of Lansdowne) knew he enter-
tained to the fullest degree to the Bill which the Right
Rev. Prelate had laid upon the table. He was bound,
then, frankly, openly, and explicitly to stare the alarm
which he felt et, and the objections he entertained to,
this measure, and in stating these grounds of alarm and
objsetion he trusted no expsession of his might be talkie'
1
I to convey an impression that he entertained the slight••st
disrespect for that sacred and learnsd body whom
1 the Right Rev. Prolate proposed to constitute into a re ar
j tribunal, and for whoin, in their proper functions, be ca-
-1 tertained—collectively and individually—the most com-
plete and entire respect. Hewever, he must say that his
motive fut troubling the it Lordships thus early on the - r.
question was that he objected at that moment to any lc-
I aislation at all upon the subject, arid that he thought the
o
very circumstance of the inevitable misconstruction
I which would be put upon any measure for altering that
tribunal which was the constitutional tribunal in this
country for the t:icl of those cases, and which has for
t • centuries exercised those functions, furnithed of itself
i decisive ground of obiection to the measure. Nay, the
! very haste to proceed with the Bill at the present mo-
-1 merit—for ho could not conceal from himself that the
i anxiety to proceed with the Bill had arisen from the die-
! sensfaetion which had been h It, if not expressed, at a
recent decision of that august tribunal which was invested '
i by the Crown, by the law. and by the Constitution, with
t the administration of her Majesty's prerogatite—he did
Inot say, indeed the Right Rev. Prelate would admit that
interpretation of the origin of the Bill, but that he would
disclaim it in fact, whatever doubts he might have had
respecting that decision—but the very haste to proceed
with the Bill would pass the highest censure upon that
decision, which, after solemn consideration, had been
I adopted by that body; for would not the public
i he led to think that if such a sentence, and such a
verdict, had not been delivered by that tribunal, Parlia-
ment would never have been called upon to interpose for
the alteration of the constitution of the tribunal? Fur
himself, although, as President of the Council, he was ne-
cessarily a niensber, that was, had the right of entrance
to all those Comer ttees cif the Privy Council, yet upon
questions of a judicial nature he had thought it to be his
duty never to take any part in their proceedings, and
i the only advice which at the commencement of this par-
ticular proceeding he had thought it his duty to give
was that the Right Reverend Prelate the Archbishop of
York and the Bishops being Privy Councillors should be
specially invited to sit at the tribunal for the purpose if
assisting at its decision. Nut speaking, then, as a mem-
ber of that tribunal, bit; in common with the great body
of the community and a large portion of the clergy, he
considered tee judgment given by that tribunal to be
perh:sps only too setisiactory in the present unhappy—he
and almost said distempered—state of men's minds on the
subject. It had certainly given as much satisfaction as
he nature of the eubject and of the difficulty psrnerted.
Fie had again, then, to ask their Lordships whether any
attempt tit once, not merely to qualify, but to supersede
hat tribunal, would not have rite effect of stripping its
decision of all weight and dignity, to which none Of Their
Lordships a ho was not prepared to make a great change
in the constitution of the country was preyared to as-
sent? What would be the consequi nee, if, whenever
any impiirtant decision of a judicial tribunal were given,
it should be followed up by an attempt to alter its con-
' stitution? L t them suppose, for insittnee, the case of
he C curt of Qmen's Bench, alien it was presided over
by Lord natistitild, and when it test's) a decisitin upon a
e ebrete i case of libel which then g estiy agitated the
eountry; or the case of the Court of Common Pleas
vhen, under Lord Camden's presidency, it pronounced a
lecithin on the question of general warrants—what
stoul ! have been the case if, immediately after their di -
tision in those cases, the jurisdiction of the Qiiiten'e
Teich in cases of libel had been taken away, or the
jurisdiction of the Court of Common Pleas altered?
Would it not have been considered as a reflection upon
hose judgments? But though there was much dis-
satisfaction felt at those decisions, no such sugitestion
tied been made. For those reasons, then, he was not
prepared to give his assent, on the part of the Go
/eminent, to proceeding further with this Bill. He
sad, besides, the strongest objection to the measure,
ss striking a blow at her Majesty's prerogative, in-
iiroducing as it were a tribunal which, in the lan-
guage of the Bill, was to be binding and conclu-
sive on her Majesty's Privy Council, and was to
leprive her Majesty of iho power which the Sove-
reign had exercised, not merely from Protestant times—
from the time of the Reformation—but from the very
earliest period of the empire. The Right Rev. Prelate,
indeed, said he did not consider the exercises of that
peeler by the Crown to he an intolerable burden upon
he Church; but he (the Marquis of Lansdowne) would
;o a step further, and say that it was essential to the
independence and safety of the Church, both of which
would btl diminished by the Bill, inasmuch as the jude-
nent of her Majesty and her advisers would be shackled,
snd because the decision under this Bill would be bind-
ing and conclusive, leaving her Majesty and her advisers
to option whatever. It the Privy Council were only to
ire required to receive decisions without the power of
touching or altering them, their functions might just as
well be discharged by Mr. Greville, their clerk. without
setting the whole machinery of, ho Privy Council in
notion.—(Hear, hear.) It was mportant that their
Lordships should keep in view that the power of the
4overnment of the Church was one which, at all times
aefere the Reformation, at the Reformation, and since
she Reformation, had formed one of the most essential
prerogatives of the Crown. From the Reforinetion
•here followed a series of examples which established
~his fact beyond a doubt—not only that the Crown
toad uniformly exercised the power of control-
ling the decisions in ecclesiastical affairs, of pre-
Jouncing upon them through persons whom it had
thought fit to employ, but of choosing the must
proper persons, lay or ecclesiastical, to decide upon
hose nnetters.—(llear, hear.) 'rise Court of Delegates
was constituted not of ecclesiastics only, but of ecclesias-
tics and civilians. Under that Court a commission was
issued, and he had been informed by one of the most
,'minuet civilians of the country, that if there was a ques-
tion of fact and not of doctrine to be determined, a clause
-vas inserted in the commission requiring that no decree
should be pronounced without the assent and presence of
he head of the Church.—(Hear, hear.) The question
to be determined in this case was a question of tact and
of law, and not a question of what the law ought to be.
—(Hear, hear.) Now, if it a ere a question of doctrine,
requiring peculiar habits of education and study, and at-
tention to theology, to determine whether a certain
doctrine ought to be taught or not, his should be inclined
to agree with the Right Rev. Prelate that the tribunal in
such case ought to consist of spiritual persons. But that
was not the case, for they were now dealing with facts,
and not seeking to ascertain whether new doctrines were
to be decreed.—(Hear, hear.) He was no friend to the
revival of convocation. He agreed with the emphatic
:verds of one of the greatest statesmen of this country,
end one most attached to ecclesiastical esta,blisk
inents, Burke, who when stating that the convoca-
ion and its powers, though dormant, still ex•
isted in this country, and might be called forth
at any given moment, added, " They might be called
forth by those who having the Popish spirit could con-
jure up that spirit, but who would not dare to defy the
consequences which it would produce." If a convoca-
tion were brought together, he would not exclude from
it all those who had not the good fortune to be bishops.—
[" Hear, hear," from the Bishop of Exeter.] Ile was
glad to hear the Right Rev. Prelate assent to that pro-
position. If it was intended to raise up new doctrines,
or to modify old ones, it could only be done by convoca-
tion, and it would not be a convocation by the law and
the constitution unless it included with the bishops
the inferior clergy also. Not only would it be wrong
and unconstitutional to exclude them, but it would be in
(he highest degree inexpedient to do so,—(Hear, hear.)
Now, what was stated to be the object of the Bill? It
was said that it would produce peace and concord. But
was it quite certain that on getting rid of a tribunal
composed of a limited number of persons, and substi-
tuting another composed of a much greater number,
bringing to that tribunal preconceived opinions—he
would not say preconceived prejudices—but precon-
ceived opinions which they could not easily lay aside;
he would ask whether they could believe that when all
those scattered seeds of doctrine which abound
at this moment were driven within the enclosure of this
tribunal, a stream of harmony and concord would im-
mediately arise?—(Hear, hoer.) He doubted whether,
within the precincts of the Church itself, there would be
much harmony; but if, unfortunately, it should become
notorious that there was only a majority—perhaps a
bare majority—of the bishops entertaining the view of
the doctrine or question submitted to them, and that the
minority consisted of perhaps the two archbishops and
the persons possessing the best information on the sub-
ject, who could expect the majority of the clergy tot
ac-
quiesce in such a decision? Any one expecting such
as t
result must be very ignorant of human nature. !
to be expected that the clergy would give up their opi-
nions when out of 3:2 persons 16 or 17 decided a
excludedonewa
and 15 another, they themselveshaving been
decision
be
e the
1 from any part in the deliberations on which
rni,ght be founded? The Right Rev. i relate admitted
that the object of the Bill was to take the decision out
of the hands of incompetent parties and place it in the
hands of competent persons—that it took the reality
from the laity, leaving nothing but the form.—
(The Bishop of London made some remark which
did not reach the gallery.) If the object of the Bill
was net in any way to affect the existing doctrine,
but strictly to limit and confine the decision of fact, then
he would boldly say that laymen were most competent
to decide on that matter.—(Llear, hear.) Nuw, what he
;asked the House to maintain was a good decision—a
decision from persons not pretending to be connoisseurs
in theology, but persons able to distinguish what are
fats in theology and what are not--and this has been
the uniform course of the law and of the constitution.--
(Hear.) In all the cases whicti hail fallen under his
I observation, courts of law, in dealing with difficult cases,
Iwith respect to which they did not possess such par-
ticular knowledge as would enable them to come to a
had uniformly done—what? Ab-
satisfactory decision,
diclte their authority? Cull upon the Queen to esta-
blish another tribunal? No such thing. They called
', before them, as the Privy Council had done on this oc-
casion, those person, who were b-st able to give them
Luthority, learning, and intonation. They had done

1850.

Twith regard to theology what had been with regard to
the other sciences. With respect to the science of
chemistry, in the case of Mr. Watt's iaveethor,
I what was the course tatters by the Court of Chan-
cery? The Court took time to considor: it ex-
amined chemist after chemist, who were subject to a
variety of interrogatories; and having satified itself,
pronounced a decree which became the law of the land,
and give the whole country (the chemists included)
perfect satisiactien. In that case the parties did not
torn round and call upon the Crown to constitute a new
tribunal.—(Hear, hear.) From looking to the declara-
tions of our ancestors—thm] Ineking at the declaretions
01. eminent divins—from looking to the Articles them-
selves and the best- writers upon those Articles, he had
come to the conclusion that it was the intention_of the
founders of the Church to leave certain matters, in :seine
degree, open to opinion. To go back from that wise
policy, and to narrow the sphere of that opinion, tar
from conducing to peace and quietness, would be only
as incentive to dissension.—(Hear, hear.) To require
ueitet from good and wise, aed holy natie upon every
lesaneh of deetrine, would be the surest way of prevent-
ire; the effieteiont union of [hose good and wise, and
holy men, for the purpre,e of advancing those great in-
terests in which our prosperity and happiuest, now and
hereafter, are involved.—(Hear, hear.) It was proposed
that the decision should to by a majority. Why
the effect of a majority so decided would be to bind
the public and the Church for one moment t 3 one
opinion, but the other parry would look forward to an-
other time when other Bishops would give a decision
adverse to that of the miti why, and a continual contest
would be carried on to procure the abrogation of the
deeitioe—(liear ) A worse state of things ha could not
imagine.—(Hear.) lie had no objection to stet*, that,
while he could not inter Wee the principle of the Judicial
Committee as established by the Act of the Noble and
Learned Lord—while he could not sacrifice the prero-
gative of the Crown as it had hitherto existed, he
thought it most dssirable for the purpose of showing to
the public that these questiene could not be determined
without the great eu.thorities of the Church being fully
heard upon true sultject —that it should not be left to the
Crown, that it sttould not be left to the Presi-
dent of the Council merely to invite the attendance
of the Right Rev. Prelates, but that all those who are
Privy Councillors should be members of the Committee.
These matters might be worthy of further consideration;
but believing that the present measure would tend to
keep alive the differences which at present unfortunately
prevailed, he should move that the Bill be read a second
time this day six mouths.—(Cheers.)
Lord BROUGHA.SI said the two speeches which had
just been delivered had placed their Lordships in pos-
session of the whole of the arguments on both sides ;
and he had nn hesitation in saying, if he were called
upon to say " Aye " or " Nu" to the question whether
they should proceed with the Bitl without subjecting it
to alteration, ho sh .uld at once vote for its postpone-
ment.—(Hear.) He stood in a peculiar position on the
present occasion, which made him desirous of grappling
with the difficulties which surrounded this important
question—important for this reason that it trenched
upon great constitutional dectrines—imp 'leant for this
other reason, that the people of England had their eyes'
sedulously and anxiously directed to the con trot ersy—but
important, above all, because the venerable feoric of the
Church of England was now placed ie ctreurnstaucee
that filled all her fr:ends with the greatest -anxiety.—
(Hear, heir ) Why was he pertheularly anxious at this
moment? Because he had established the pre-
sent tribunal on the ruins of the Court of Dsbeghtes
and the Court of R.yiew.—(Hear, hear.) There
were now great differences in the Church. The
Church was threatened with a schism. This could not
be denied, and therefore they should take great care that
no measures rectived their sanction which might afford
the least chance of widening the breach, and neither
shoull they hastily and without due consideration reject
a measure which was proposed for the purpose of heal-
in„ the breach that now existed —(Hear.) It was upon
those grounds that he had come to the conclutien that
they ought not at onceand altogether to reject this Bill,
hut they should see it they could remove those übjec-
lions which he fer one entertained against it, and which,
if he found to be insuperable, he would certainly give
to it his negative.—(deer.) By this B 11 it seas pro-
posed that the prelate's should decide, eini should answer
the question "aye" or " no"—via, "Is this the doctrine
of the Church of Eugland," and when a majority of
the prelates had so settled thet question, teen the
Judicial Committee were to be bound by a decision
of the majority. Now he, as a member of the
Judicial Committee, had sworn to administer justice
according to his conscience, and that he could.. not
if he was to b t bound by the decision of another.
By the Bill now proposed the Judicial Committee would
be bound by the decision ef 14 of the bishops, even
though they might be of opinion that the minority of the
13 bishops were great lovers of their flocks, and that the
I t were, he would not say less lovers of their flocks, but
less brilliant, less distinguished, and less eminent than
the minority.—(Laughter.) And then let them see
"that would be the consequence of this. The 14 who
decided what were the doctrines of the Church declared
at the same time that the 13 held doctrines that were not
of the Church. The 13 bishops would be pronounced
to be heretics by these who decided against them.—
(Hear.) The prelates who decided that Mr. Gorham
was orthodox, must declare that the prelates opposed to
him were heterodox.—(Hear.) But then it had been
said to him—how wee he, a mere layman, to reverse the
decision of an ecclesiastical court? His answer was that
Sir Herbert Futt was as much a layman rs himself.—
(Laughter.) Aye, it was answered to him, but he was
appointed ey the archbishop. Aye, he replied, put
that did not make him a prelate; no, nor as much as a
deacon in the Church—(Laughter)—scd if Sir Her-
bert Fast was appointed by the archbishop, he (Lord
Brougham) was appointed by one higher than
art archbishop—by the head of the Church—by one
who appointed the archbishop himself—(Laughter)—
stud his court was, therefore, es much a spiritual court
as that of Sir 11. Fast.—(Laughter.) Their judgment
might be aided by the opinions of able and learned men;
all the faithful, lay and clerical, were interested in ascer-
taining whether there might not be some mode of obtain-
ing a satisfactory' decision when differences in theologi-
cal opinions arose. The means, he thought, should be
afforded of obtaining the opinions of prelates who were
:roll qualified; but not that the Judicial Committee of
the Privy Council should be bound by their opinions. He
would net haver convocation of twenty-seven bishops,
but he would enable the bishops to select a certain num-
ber, who would report their opinions to the Judicial
Committee, to aid it in coming to a conscientious deci-
sion. There might be a certain number of bishops to
whom a case should he sent, those in whom the Judicial
Committee and the Church had the greatest confidence,
and if the numbers were four, and they differed, another
might be brought in to aid them. He had reason to think
that it a Bill with such modifications as he suggested
ores sent elsewhere its success would be greatly facili-
tated. Making these suggestiens, he cordially concurred
in the second reading of the Bill. As to a convocation,
if it were summoned they would have a schism, and
a prelate ut the head of etch little schism. They
theuld all labour to sustain a Church which of all
Churches was the most pious, the most learned, and
the most tolerant. Other Churches might be as
learned, might be as pious, still no Church but the An-
glican Church united so much of all these indispensable
qualities—piety first, learning next, and above all
charity, meekness, and toleratiou.—(Cheers.) Of all
the Dissenters he had ever met whose opinions were '
worth consulting he had always heard them say, God
forbid that evil should happen to a Church which we
have ever found to be a tolerant neighbour.--(dear.)
This, then, was a reason wny they should desire that
the breach should be healed and not widened. It would,
therefore, be to all but the rabble crew who objected to
it on account of its revenue, a source of gratification
that the discord should cease, and that the Church
might rise up in renewed strength from its temporary
obscuration. Such was a prayer in which ho heartily
joined with the Right. Rev. Prelate.—(Cheers.)
The Bishop of Sr. DAVID'S stated, that until
very recently he had entertained the hope that it would
be in his power to give his support to the Biil intro-
duced by the Right Rev. Prelate. It was not without
crest pain, and not without anxious and mature
consideration, he felt bound to abandon that hope.
He could not assent to the dogma that there rested in
the body of the bishops in their official character any
peculiar or exclusive prerogative, or any pre-eminent
and transcendent qualifications, which rendered them the
only proper judges upon questions of doctrine arising
within the Church. So tar from entertaining that
opinion he must say ho thought that the constitution of
the proposed court of appeal would have been materially
improved if there had been associated with the prelates,
or with any number of them, a certain number of per-
sons drawn not only from the other orders of the Church
but also from the laity. He was not prepared to say
whether this would have been practicable or not, but it
did appear to him that it would have been a great im-
provement in the constitution of the court, and have re-
moved a very material objection to the measure; he
would observe, however, that if there had been no other
question involved than this he should have deemed it at
least consistent with his duty to vote for the
second reading of the Bill, with a view of
afterwards removing its imperfections, and abat-
ing the disc ivauteges which were likely to
result from the proposed constitution of the court. But
in his mind there were other and much graver objec-
tions to the measure as now proposed. That clause of
the Bill which rendered the opinion of the assembled
bishops , on the points of doctrine submitted to them
binding and conclusive on the members of the Judicial
Committee had already been objected to on what he
considered very strong grounds, but they were not to his
judgment the only ones or the strongest. He must say
that that clause interfered very considerably with the
rights of conscience of the members of the Judicial Corn-
mittt e, considered not merely as members of the Privy
Council, but as members of the Church. It had been
censidered that it would be a desirable qualification of
the members of that Commit:eel that they should all be
members of the Church; but h, did not understand how
it could be consistent with the rights of conscience that
a lay member of the:Church who might have inquired into
and formed a decide I and conscientious opinion aid con-
viction upon the subjects submitted to him toucniegouhri!
religious faith, should be expected to he b
hetd
and concluded by the opinion of others, so far that_:l_l,,
must aetnally adopt and act up that opihrtieonu.,_,T,
wasi
though constituting a grave tejecdon to the
mind. He
He
not the part which weighed might at a
was willing to suppose that this measure
_l3l,
mo=t upon his
differsnt time and under different circumstancesll(a,.l .
been admirably adapted to its avowed rn.'d'rerj-c- a;
but he held that they had no right to cons' the tom_
sleet in t h,,t general light, and that they were bound to
take existing circum,tsnces in connexion with it,—
(hie,
de ear; i
ense hour.) a
5e,.,1 e l
y out of thestate of a
lie believed ta at thee preventemite e 3measure
t which
had been produced by recent proceedings well known to
remedy for som
every one—(Hear, hear)—and he most telte the liberty
, I w.suming that hs sp chic design ea, to pr.: leek, a
.:thing that was regarded as a recent ex-

isting evil—that its peculiar design was to restore and
re-establish (if possible) peace, tranquilli:y, and har-
mony in the Church; and he thought that the rosin
subject of their Lordships' consideration whether
this, as a means, was or was not adapted to such
an end.—(Hear, hear.) If it were a measure
that was likely te produce peace and hurmany in the
Church, he should wish to know what party in the
Church it was designed to conciliate?—(Louis cheers.)
There was a large party in the Church who consi-
dered that the recent judgment was substantitilly right,
and that it had averted a great and serious evil and
danger from the Church. He did not IneSS, to deny
(hat there wire, even among these persons, many who
in the abstract were very much dissatisfied with the
present composition of the court of upped in sptritual
matters, because they had objected most strongly to
the court below which passed the sentence that had
been revered by the existing court of appeal, and he
had a right, therefore, to infer that they wet e 4 qually
dissatisfied with the constitution of the Judicial Com-
mitteencil
et
ot hhlreei as rspatoiornsf,d?yc description,°iun
whomt l'Bssett ihabbati
th:c:ioiseuivi:4:tmftfeottir. ist;hildil:eetc dewrienh'uogenntslitedLut‘ isoe:tnir:c"ni teas
ihsi set):
they
viewed but
viewed it at least with a considerable degree of
distrust. of jsalousy, and of alarm —(Reneared cheer-
ing.) Then who else would be saliefiel by the Bill!
It tenet be those persons undoubtedly who hads,xpressed
feelings of distil:so of alarm, and, even as he hliel wit-
rlsssel, ef consternation at the recent decision.—(Hear.
hear.) But had this measure given satisfaction to them?
Why they had publicly declared themselves dissatisfied
with it. Bat who wore the others who did approve of
the miasuce us it stood? He btgged the I.loase to con-
sider oa what eriends and for what reasons it was that
these persons did approve of it. Was it not that they
regarded it simply as a stesping stone by ithich they
might advance to rnmeihitg beyond i:?—(Haar, hear.)
This appeared to him therefore an insurmountable ob-
jection to the measure.—(Cheers.) He could describe
its practical effect as nothing but this—that it would
open a new arena for theological controversy—(Heat,
hear).--and the ctTect of opening that arena teould and
must be to invite neve combatants to try their strength
upon it, and to fight there what they would
all " The Battle of the Church."--(Cheers.)
It was impossible for any one whose attention had been
excited ley the circumstances of the times tea say that
this was an imaginary or a chimerical danger. For his
own part he could not shut his eyes to the scenes that
were passing near him, nor his ears to the language
which he found used on public occasions by persona who
did not scruple to avow that they looked forward to the
disrupture of Church and State as a possible contingency,
as a calamity indeed, but not at all as the greatest of
calamities, but, on the contrary, as the latent of two
evil., the other evil being the failure of their own peca-
bads- favourite scheme for the improvement of the
Church.—(Hear, hear.) If there were persons who con-
sidered this disrupture as the least of two evils,
and did not scruple so to express themselves, then
he felt strougly inclined to suspect that there were
others who viewed it with still more favour and de-
light, who en-re disposed to c,aisider that catastrop
not as an evil, but rather as positive good. Of so much
he sties certain. that there were persons who looked for-
ward to the euthanasia of the Church of England, and
con tdered that that Church should finally be merited in
the Church of Rome; and if these persons a iehed to ac-
complish that which they thought so desirable, the step
that they would most likely take would be to produce, if
possible, such a division and rupture within the Church
as should eliminate from it those of its members who
were the most firmly attached to the peculiar doctrines
of the Protestant Reformation—(Hear, hear)--and they
would have reason to suppose that, as soon as that con-
summation arrived, there would probably be interposed
but very feeble obstacles to that which they looked for-
ward to beyond it.—(He tr.) Divide et impera, he be-
lieved, continued to be a Roman maxim, and ha was very
much afraid that it was becoming an English
one—(Cheers)—at least he believed that they who were
most eager to promote the division would be the fore-
most to give in their allegiance to the subsequent opi-
nior:s.—Hear.) In one way the present measure
dirt crly tended to that end, by rendering almost ine-
viteble a fatal division in one great body of the Church
—namely, the Episcopate.—(Hear, hF Cr.) Whilst en-
tertaining these views, however—and they were his
deliberate and settled convict ons—he did not feel him
pelt bound to divide against a measure to %hien he be-
lieved a majority of his Right Rev. Brethren continued
to give their support. Still he could nor share in the
resp of a measure which, instead of being a
remedy, would most likely aggravate and multiply the
danger which threatered the Church.
Lord REDESDALE regretted the change which had
taken place in the opinions of the Right Rev. Prelate
who had just spoken in reference t this measure. It
was impossible things could go on in their present state.
There was a crisis in the Church, and matters could not
he kit as they were without serious consequences.—
(Hear, hear.) It was time that Right Rev. Prelates
stood iorwerd and put them right. He held that too
great liberty to the clergy was an injury to the laity.
He would ask their Lordships, supposing he lived in
a parish to which Mr. Gorham was appointed, and
assuming ho objected to Mr. Gorhutu's doctrine,
was he not subjected to an injury in having such
a man to guile him and his religious opi-
nions, when the Right Reverend Prelates declared
they did not hold the came dectribet? Yet, in such a
case, he anti his tarnily would be thread all their lives to
submit to Mr. Gorham's teaching. With reference to
the recent judgment, be would ask bt- whom was the de-
cision looked upon with satisfaction ? It was not looked
upon with as much satisfaction by any party in our own
Church, as by Roman Catholics and the extreme Dis-
, center,. They saw, by the decision. Churchmen were
put in sack a position in the eyes of the world, that it
was impossible to remain in connexion with the Church
unless they denied one of its Articles. The Right Rev.
Prelate proposed to those who advocated episcopal go-
y. 'ament, that iii such matters they should look to the
Bishops for guidance. He considered there was less
difference o! pioion likely to arise in the court se
proposed to be constituted than in the existing
court. He accepted the Bill, 'sanitise the tribunal pro-
posed was the only Church tribunal in which an agree-
ment was likely to be obtained. He had never ex-
pressed violent opinions, tra. had he favoured violent
opinions iu others. This was a period of great change.
it was not unlikely that the next appointment to the
bench would be Mr. Gorham himself. Many appoint-
ments had been made of late to show the subserviency
of the Church to the State, and many persons had been
forced on the Church who ought never to have found
themselves there.—(Hear.) The present Ministry had
appointed one Right Reverend Prelate to the bench who
had laboured under the censure of his university on ac-
count of doctrinal questions. To show the feeling by
which appouttnents were made, nethieg was more likely
than to ate an order issue for the appointment of Mr.
Gorham to the bench. It was not proper that any
prerogative which it might be thought desirable for
the Sovereign to possess should be endangered
by an improper appointment to the office of
bishop. The supremacy of the Sovereign was
imposed and held under awful responsibilities.
The Sovereign was the heed of the Church.
and bound to see that the Church did not suffer underther
reign. By the intervention el Parliament, if persons
were forced on the Queen who ought not to be found in
the Church. the Queen might be placed in a position
in which duty was at war with expediency. The way to
tdae l
lea
rto
e
themselves proud of her alliance. If the Established
ahterre nnage' ihuebne rtsh, e aCiihdutroc he
nwaabsl e tothowseakme ehmerberresspt;
Church did not compare advantageously with other
churches, it was because she did nut enjoy in full purity
her Catholic doctrines.
Lord CA MPI3ELL considered that as no party matter,
but a great constitutional principle was involved in the
cp. stion, it was his duty to offer his opinion to the
tiouse. It would have given him extreme pleasure
if he could conscientiously have supported the Bill. Re
had a great respect fir the Right Rev. Prelate, and the
ability no had displayed in introducing the measure. No
one was a more sincere friend than himself to there Este*
Wished Church. He believed the institute was beloved
by the great bulk of the people of England, and
that it had conferred, and was calculated to confer,
the greatest blessings on the kingdom. With the
view of securing these benefits, he was forced to con-
demn the Bill. After the most unprejudiced and impar-
tial consideration, the Bill appeared to him unconstitu-
tional, and as likely to bring about that disruption of the
Church, which it was so desirable to prevent. The crest
objection of the Right Rev. Prelate appiared to be to
the constitution of the Judicial Committee. It seemed
to him that this objection arose from not havieg pro-
perly considered what were the functions of that tri-
bunal. The functions of the tribunal were the functions
of a court of construction to explain documents. In his
opinion the existing court, as constituted, as far as the
explanation of the written doctrines, articles, and formu-
laries of the Church of England was concerned, was
better framed for such a purpose than the
_court e`m2-
templated by the Bill of the Right Rev. Prelate. It
it had alread
Now, ,naostnore a lay triy-
had been cited as a great offence out of the House that
this tribunal was a lay tribunal. N
been truly explained, the tribunal a
Durham. It was found
by experience as these courts west, competent to decisia
bunal than were the Court of Arches and the Court of
the Chancellor of the Bishop of
questions,
ithce of laymen, who act-d as the substitutes of church.. Prelate
• that it was advantageous to call in the assist.
men. The Right Rev. had said that an appeal
to
and
their
om bishop,ihe rticdh
bfirsohnlo p
the Anglo-Saxon
bishop to the archbishop, the
to
This adusitt,d that the Sovereign was the
the King.
lay from the archeic.:hcoonp,
times, so it was by the Constitutions of Clarendon, and
s, it was by the Reormation. But the archbishop, the
head of the Church, and so it was in
bishop, and the archdeacon, had each their lay advisers,
„I so had the Sovereign. Ile (Lord Campbell) was
therefore of opinion, that offence had been taken
roost ennecetsarily that the Judicial Committee of
the Privy Council Was a lay tribunal, in contradis•
tinction to the inferior courts from which the appeal
was made. The Court propoAcd by the Bill was to
consist of the prelates of the two provinces
of Canterbury ; but in his (Lord Campbell's)
opinion such a court would be mere mockery.
Ile should think it far mere respectful to move
tee second reaalzig of the Bill that day six months
ti.4n ~gree to the principle prop ..ended in tho mea-
sure. It %vas proposed that this court should be au
mbly of ad tee bishops in England, aid that their
h t should he hiiiilitorp not alone on the Judicial Com-
mittee of the Privy Council, but also on the Queen,
whom it sought to make as much ministerial in the
matter as possible—if the Bill hall any principle it was
t!)a,; but if it. wai allowed that the title of Read of
the Church " was not a mere honorary title or faculty,
as st as that of the Sovereigns of France, but involved
the poseessiou of substantial power in ecclesiastical
matters, whe.!,te.!anie of the Bili, which in point of fact
propood to divest the Queen of that power to invest it in
the bishops.? The analogy attewpttd to be established