CHURCH OF ENGLAND IN VAN DIEMEN'S LAND. MEETING OF THE LAITY. (Abridged from the "Hobart Town Courier," of the 28th of May.)

New Zealander, Volume 7, Issue 549, 19 July 1851, Page 2

CHURCH OF ENGLAND IN VAN DIEMEN'S LAND. MEETING OF THE LAITY. (Abridged from the " Hobart Town Courier," of the 28th of May.)

A Public Meeting of the Lay Members of the Church of England was held on Friday evening lost, the 23rd instant, at six o'clock, in the hall of the Mechanics' Institute in this city, for the purpose of taking into consideration the Minutes of Proceedings at a Meeting of the Metropolitan and Suffragan Bishops of the Province of Australasia, held at Sydney, from October Ist to November Ist, 1850, as published in the Colonial Journals in January last, and other questions connected therewith. The hall was crowded, and comprised a considerable body of clergymen of the Established Church. T. J. Knight, Esq. was called to the chair by acclamation. The Rev. Dr. Bedhhid having engaged in prayer, Mr. Knight said, —Most of you are probably more or less informed of the occasion that has brought us together. Our meeting has its origin from the Conference of the Australian Bishops in Sydney, in October and November last; their decisions and resolutions were made known to the clergy of a neighbouring colony; the clergy of Adelaide, at the suggestion of their Bishop, deliberated on them, and spoke their minds. The lay members of the Church of England, too, in Adelaide deemed it right to take the minutes into their thoughtful consideration, and their deliberations resulted in certain resolutions, which were adopted by a public meeting of members of the Church of England in Adelaide, which have been published. The Clergy of the southern division of this island, in Chapter assembled, have made the minutes of the Bishops the subject of an address to our Bubop ; and they ore to form the subject of discussion this evening. It is delightful and refreshing to announce to you that our cause (if so I may call it) derives fresh and gratifying encouragement from recent proceedings at Melbourne, and from the harmonious cotrespondence that has passed between the beloved Bishop of that diocese and his clergy. The attention of xhe clergy of Mel);>9«ine was called toy a gnculnr

from their Bishop to the minutes, with a view to the expression of their opinions theieon, and also with a \ie\v to their publication, both in the colony and in England. I may say that the principles embodied in then* letter to the Bishop (and to which Ihs Loulship'a reply is most gracious and conciliating;) are in haimony w:th those which actunte the association recently formed m this country for maintaining the principles of the Protestant Reformation ; and there is much harmony in opinion between the Clergy of Adelaide, the lay members of the Church of England in Adelaide, the Bishop of Melbourne and his clergy, and the opinions recently expressed by the Chapter of the Clergy of the Archdeaconry of Hobarton. It having been ascertained that a copy of the decisions and resolutions had been forwarded to England, "with a view to Imperial Legislation," a strikingly deep and important interest was added to the subject; and, having regard to this circumstance, a great many laymen of this side the island (500 I believe) signed a requisition to the Bishop, respectfully requesting him to convene a meeting of the lay membprj of the Church of England, to take the minutes of the Conference into consideration. Mr. Knight then read the letter from the Lord Bishop, in which his Lordship declined convening a meeting o£ the lay members of the Church to consider the minutes of Conference. The Chairman resumed — His Lordship, you observe, declined to comply with the request of the reqaisitionists — and yet we are assembled. Allow me here to make two remarks : —We are free men; the usual reognised custom of Englishmen is to assemble and to confer together on questions of general interest, face to face, and in the face of the world. But then the English are an orderly, me* tliodic.il, and withal a loyal set of beings. We desire t jjjf conduct everything fairly and above board; we d< lighl^ (if it may be so) to have the sanction and countenance of some high constituted authority ; and with feelings and motives such as these, the Sheriff is often requested to convene political meetings. But what if the Sheriff were to refuse 1 Could any one imagine that the Sheriff's refusal would, or ought to frustiate the purpose of the requisitionists. If our Bishop had been aware that the requisitionists had good reason for what they alleged, it is not impossible but that his Lordship might have convened us ; but, however that may be, I must, for my own part, protest, that I hope it may never be imputed as an offence in the community in which my lot is castif a body of men, having at first intimated to the constituted authorities their intention of meeting for the consideration of momentous matters, should afterwards assert and exercise their undoubted right to assemble, and to express their sentiments temperately, but freely, plainly, and firmly (as I trust that you will this evening), either with or without permission — nay, even despite the prohibition — of any spiritual functionary. (Loud cheers.) 1 now commend you to the business of the meeting. A letter, addressed 'to the Chairman, had been received from R. Q. Kermode, Esq., from which the fol« lowing is an extract : — (t Whether the sentiments embodied in the published Minutes of the Synod, as the expressed opinions, or as the decisions of the Bishops composing it, appears to me a matter of no moment wbaiever; it is enough for me that they are their sentiments. It must be the aim of those who entertain them to use all their authority and influence as Bishops to give them full effect in their several dioceses. They would not be sincere or consistent did they act otherwise. " But what is the evident tendency of these episcopal opinions 1 Will they not, if carried into practice — as they are doubtless designed to be — have the effect of rendei ing the clergy of every diocese the mere slaves of the Bishop ? Does not the unseemly assertion of the doctrine of baptismal regeneration — in opposition to the decision of the Privy Council, iucluding the Primate of all England — beyond all question identify the Bishops at Sydney with the Anglican parly in England, and expose us in the Colonies to all the evils which that party has too notoriously brought on the Church at home ? " 'I here is one unmistakeable result which must follow from the adoption of the sentiments of the same Synod, and which I especially deplore, — I mean the limitation of the terms of communion in our Church. It must lead to the setting up of what I consider an unscriptural standard of orthodoxy, the effect of which will inevitably be to place many whom I have delighted in, as believing with me in the same Saviour, under the odious ban of schismatics. " In such a posture of affairs, I certainly think it full time for the lay membersof the Church of England to bestir themselves. It is the duty and privilege of every Protestant to read his Bible and judge for himself. '* While we are to render all due respect to our ecclesiastical superiors, it is no canon of our Church to believe them infallible; and still less to follow them in opposition to our solemn convictions. Our first duty is to God and our own consciences." Captain Fenion, M.L.C., moved the first resolution : — That it is the right and duty of the laity to express an opinion on the decisions of the Australian Bishops put forth in the Minutes of Conference concerning the faith and practice of the Church ; and that in any assembly for administration oi the affairs of the Church, the lay members are entitled to express their opinions, to propose measures for adoption, and to deliberate and vote with the clergy; and that the restriction by the Conference of all deliberations and resolutions respecting " rules of practice and ecclesiastical order," and also respecting " the processes necessary for carrying such rules into effect," to Synods composed exclusively of clergymen, is practically to exclude the laity from the exercise of their right of being consulted in and of giving their consent to all rules and decisions concerning the faith and practice of the Church of which they are members. Captain Fenton believed that every member of the Church of England entertained a proper, positive, and reasonable conviction that they were not to take the doctrines of their Church on the authoricy of any human being whatever, but that they were to study the Scriptures for themselves. In order to show the laity of Van Diemen's Land the matters most desirable to take into consideration, he would refer to the decision arrived at by the clergy, the laity, and the Bishop at Melbourne. He should confine himself to those parts I which had reference to the present resolution. It was the 3rd paragraph, under the head " Diocesan Synods or Conventions" : — " We are of opinion that one assembly, called a Diocesan Synod or Convention, should be duly constituted, that it should be duly presided over by the Bishop of the Diocese, and should consist of all the Presbyters of the Church having cure of souls, or licensed by the Bishop, and of lay representatives from the ecclesiastical parishes or distiicts." Theie was another paragraph embodying the following recommendation of the clergy :— " That the Diocesan Synod or Convention consisting of clergy and laity, should be the court for the trial of any presbyter or deacon, but that theie should be a direct appeal from it to the highest Ecclesiastical Court in England." * The following was a paragraph from the Right Rev. Bishop of Melbourne's letter, under date 22nd April, 1851, which he was glad to lay before them :—: — "I am happy, however, to observe that upon the *| establishment of a Diocesan Council, to consist both of clerical and lay members, (whether they shall constitute one chamber or two is in my opinion a matter; of subordinate importance) for the management, in conjunction with the Bishop, of the local affairs of the Church ; and also upon the placing of the clergy in the same independent position with their brethren in England, (the two most important principles laid down in our minutes,) we are all perfectly agreed. There is likewise very little, if any, difference between us upoa tbo important subject of education ; and none as to the formation of Australasian Boards of Missions." It .was not only of importance, the speaker observed", to laymen of the Church of England to protest against the Minutes of Conference, but with respect to the clergy, what would be the certain results 1 Why, they would not be free agents — they would be compelled to preach, not according to their own convictions, but according to the direction of the head of their Church, with every respect for the bead of his Church, he should protest against such an aggression- He concluded by moving the resolution. John Dunn, Esq., Junr., M.L.C., seconded the resolution, which was put from the chair, and adopted with. ! one dissentient. J. G. Francis, Esq., after a hw preliminary observations, proposed the second resolution, which was as follows -.—That this Meeting regards with apprehension the Minutes of Bishops ou the subject of Holy Baptism put forth as the "just interpretation of the Formularies of the Church of England respecting the Regeneration of Infants," as tending to narrow the terms of communion with, and admission into, our Chuich. Major CorroN seconded the resolution, which was put and carried, with only one dissentient, as before. James Barnard, Esq., in proposing the next resolution, soul: The resolution, Sir. which I have the honor to propose is second to none in piactical importance. But before proceeding with further comment, I will place the meeting in possession of the "decisions and opinions" of the Bishops to which my resolution applies ,—

" (')) M/iiun/H.r 1-.—(1))1 -.— (1)) We are of opinion that mini&teis of the Chinch of England ought not to solemnize maniago between peisons neither of whom is of our own communion, except in cases where themanugo cannot w itlioiit extreme ililliciiity be solemnized in any other way." " 11. MiNismv to Disscs'ttrs.-— We are of opinion that the general piinciple of colonial legislation, by vhicli the equality of all religious denominations is ibcognizcd, ieleas< j s the clergy of the Church of England in these colonies from the obligation to peiform religious sei vices for persons who are not members > f our own Chinch." Theie is another significant passage which it is necessary al^o to read in connexion w lth dies", and which is deserving the most serious attention of every member of the Church of England: — "IV. Church ftlLMßLßsiirp.— We acknowledge as membeis of the Church of England all persons who, having been duly baptised, aie confoimable to the doctrines 1 , government, rites and ceremonies contained in the book of Common Pi ayer; it being understood that they are entitled to claim, at the hands of its ministcts the lights and ceremoniesol our Church, so long as they shall continue conformable to the extent above required." Sir, I confess that I am altogether at u loss to conipiehend the giounds for the adoption of such an uncharitable—l miobt say, of such an unchristian resolution on thep.irt of the Conference ; for it certainly breathes nothin" oflhe piinciples of Chi wtianity— nothing of the spirit of the Divine Founder of our religion ; but i.ivouis altogether of that peculiar school of anti-Pro-testant theology fiom whence it evidently enanates. To my mind, sir, it affords pi oof— if additional proof were wanting— in support of the soundness of the piinciple wlndi has this, evening been contended for— the light of the laity to participate in the administration of the alia rs of the Church ; for sure I am, sir, that the laity would never have concuired in, never have sanctioned «n evident violation of all Chiistian charity. No, sir, nor would the cleigy, 1 am convinced, have joined in this gratuitous outiage upon Chiietian feeling, if they bad been called upon to lv pionounce" upon them ; and 1 am borne out m this declaration by the recorded sentiments of the clergy of South Australia in their address to the Bishop of Adelaide upon this very subject. With, your permission, sir, I will quote the pason (too * L °' Liturgy.— Marriage of persons neither of whom belongs to the Church.— l 3. That whereas, up to a lecent period, no marriages of Dissenters in England were legal, unless celebrated according to the rites and ceieuionies of the Established Church ; and whereas at the present time the majority of Dissenting marriages are so celebtated in the mother country, we are of opinion that no Australasian clergyman ought to refuse any parties who may apply to him, though they bs not members of our own communion." "Ministry to Dissej>ti ns.— l4. That while we are relieved from any legal obligation to perform religious services for persons who are not members of our Church, yet, to guaid against any misconception, we desire to express our readiness to afford our ministerial offices, as far as in us lies, to any one who may need or desire them." Sir, these are proper Christian sentiments ; and lam bold to affirm that they are shared in by the whole body of the clergy of this diocese, with, perhaps, here and there a solitary exception. In conclusion, sir, I believe I speak the sense of the laity in expressing the deepest regret that the Bishops should have framed and promulgated such " decisions and opinions :" for if the Conference had wished to furnish an excuse for intolerance, vindictiveness, or indolence—if they had designed to insult our Protestant brethren— if they had desired to bring odium upon the clergy, and fill every parish and district with religious discoid, they could not have taken a more effectual means than by the adoption of these u decisions and opinions." Sir, I beg to move the third resolution—" That in the opinion of this meeting, the resolution of the Conference which takes upon itself to dispense with the obligation upon the clergy to perform religious services to persons who aie not members of the Church of England is irreconcileable with Christian charity." (The various points of Mr. Barnard's speech were greeted with uproarious tokens of approbation.) [Here some objections were urged to the part taken by members of other denominations, in giving warm exjiiession to their feelings. The Chairman observed that it would havo been impossible to conbne the attendance strictly to the members of the Church of England, but that he trusted that gentlemen of other denominations who were prestnt, would, upon the slighte-t point refrain from entering too warmly into the proceedings.] R. W. Nutt, Esq., said he had been reqnestpd to move the next resolution, which he read:— That this meeting deprecates, as injurious to the mental independence aud pastoral fidelity of the Clergy, and as contiary to the principles of the Piotestant Church, ihe change which has been made in the foim of licences under which the Clergy in this Diocese hold their appointments, by the introduction of clauses, by one of which the Bishop reserves to himself the power to appoint and send any Minister whom he may direct to read, take part in Divine service, and preach in any Church or at any station to which the holder of the license may from time to time be appointed and removed ;' and by (ho other of which the Bishop reserves to liimaelfthe power of ' revoking the licence, and all things therein contained, whenever he shall see just cause for the same. I shall, perhaps, best introduce the subject matter of the resolution, and the very few observations which I Intend to make upon it, by reading first the old form of license used in the colony, and then the more recent form introduced by our Bishop. (Mr. Nutt then read two forms of licences, describing the original form as the same in substance as that issued to the deacons and stipendiary curates in England, so that a minister having been ordained a priest in England having obtained a priest's licence, would formerly be compelled in his arriving in this colony not to accept the license issued to deacons, of which however we did not now complain ; biLt he would now be compelled to accept a licence containing clauses resfrving to the bishop the power to send another minister into the incumbent's church and pulpit for any teim the bishop thought fit ; and also the powftr of revoking the licence altogether, not for any just cause of offence proved against the incumbent not even for any such cause assigned, but whenever he, the bishop, should see jubt cause for the same; in oth«r words, whenever he thought fit to do so). He continued— The first objectionable clause is that by which the bishop reserves to himself the right to send any other minister to read and take part in Divine service and pi each in any church to which the incumbent may be appointed. Now, sir, without entering into any discussion of the differences between tractarian and evangelical ministers, I think I may safely affirm that they are of the most important, essential, and fundamental character ; creating in fact so great a difference between the two, that he who entertains the one opinion cannot in his conscience regard the other as sound — and I would then ask, how any independent minister could tolerate the introduction into his pulpit, even for a Sabbath, of a minister dispensating among the people doctrines which the incumbent in his conscience believes to be unsound nnd dangerous? He is then placed in one of these conditions ; he must either stifle his scruples and tolerate the piopagation of untruth among his congregation, or he must oppose their introduction, and ; thereby incur the risk of being deprived of his license for that which the bishop may consider to be an unlawful resistance to his authority, and therefore a just cause of dismissal. And that brings me to the second objectionable clause, namely, the power to revoke the li- | cense whenever the bishop shall see just cause for the same. It is clear that no man of independent mind can hereafter accept such a license, and I would therefore consider their effect upon the present body of incumbents, for it is sought to be imposed upon all alike, and is not confined, as untruly stated out of doors, to deacons and to chaplains ot convict stations. It will be admitted that perfect independence of mind is necessary to pastoral fidelity, and we may therefore fairly inquire whether a minister thus exposed to sudden dismissal at the mere will of his bishop, and for no cause of offence shown or proved, can even form, btill less express, an honest and independent opinion. Lastly, gentlemen, I legaid the exercise of the power given by this foim of license as a violation of the well known constitutional rule that neither the conduct, the character, the life, or the property of a free man shall be affected without a trial by his equals. I know that a large number of the Clergy are looking to the laity for asbistance and protection at this juncture ; the presence of many of them here would also tend to show that, and that it is our duty not to desert them, — for although there may be some few who have cot the courage to object to this form of license, thero can he scarcely one who would not desiie to be free fiom it. (Mr. Nutt was often interrupted by waim tokens of approbation.) Alexander OnR, Esq., seconded the resolution. Mr. Halt, expressed bis dissent with the mover of the resolution; and Mr. Eilision observed there was no gentleman whose opinions ho respected more than Mr, Nun's, as he wag fully aware of the sterling qua-

lilies of Ins mind and chaiacter: but with regatd to tlio ob^ei vatiom he had marlo with respect to tbedifleiont foims of licenses, iio (Ah. Elliston) did not think one clergyman held j license which was drawn up m the old foim — at least he did not know of one. (Here several Cleiaymen uilei posed and said they held them.) ]\ln. Ei.i.ibiON obseiral, that the Rev. Dr. Bedfoul did not hold one. The Rev. Dr. Bmrnnn said, '' I do." Mr. Ei 1 is ion — You hold a .Royal Licence, which I believe can be superseded any time by a stroke of the pen. Dr. 13 1 nronn — I don't hold a Royal Licence, mine is one of the old ones, and I will have no other. (Cheers.) Mr. Eilisiox stood conected, but he believed upon examination they would find that the licences the Bishop is desirous to introduce were precisely similar in form to those under which the Indian Clergy hold their situations. Tins was originally a poition of the Diocese of Calcutta; and in point of fact, lhs Lordship was only leturning to ihe old form. He aKo thought that 100 much stress bad been laid upon another point, as to the desire of the Bishops to maintain absolute control ovei the clergy ; they would find that the Bishops did not propose to exeicise a deposing' power until a cleitryman had been tiied by his peers. Ho j did not get up for the purpose to expiess his own feelings upon the subject, beyond reminding- them that no notice had been taken of the fact that the now licences were precisely similar to those issued by Bishops Helier, Wilson, &c. Mr. Nutt, in reply, was quite aware of the truth of Mr. Elhston's observation. He was right. The new licences were in the form formerly used in India, and they were issued to itinerant gentlemen, who when travelling- about the country, fiom business or inclination, had no objection to act as the Company's Chaplains, receiving in return payment for the same. He, Mr. Nutt, might be induced to admit that a provision enabling them to be superseded might in these cases be propei ly introduced ; but was it seemly, he would ask, to have such a contingency impending over the heads of ministers — to fix them in a more dependent situation than the protestant piiests of England— .should we thus degrade the friends of our families — the fathers of our native youth ? (Cheers.) The resolution was then put from the chair, and carried unanimously. E. S. P. Bedford, Esq., moved — That the address respecting the Minutes of Conference, which was adopted by the Chapter of the Archdeaconry of Ilobarton at the Meeting held in Maich last, is a vindication of the rights and independence of the Clergy and Lay Members of the Church ; and that the moral courage displayed by the Ministers, under their peculiar position, in the adoption of that Address, entitles them to the gratitude, respect, and support of this Meeting, and of the Church in general. The meeting to which the resolution referred was called together by circular ; and as some misapprehension had existed upon the subject, he begged to say that it was not a meeting- of rebellious clergymen showing rebellious marks of defiance. It was no such thing-. The meeting of the Chapter was convened by the Archdeacon of Hobarton to consider the Minutes of the Conference at Sydney. The Archdeacon had an address prepared for their appioval, but foitunately for Churchmen it appeared that he had around him a body of clergy who, notwithstanding the uncertain tenure of their licences, would not tamely sit down and sacrifice their own rights and the interests of the laity, and adopted another address as an amendment, by a large majority. It was their duty, unless morally convinced that the decisions and opinions of the Bishops were coirect, to protest against them, and they had done so — the result was this meeting; and the measures adopted by the laity will ultimately tend to settle the Church question in this colony. W. Keumodc, Esq., formerly Member of the Legislative Council, seconded the resolution with all his heart. The resolution was carried. T. Donsov, Esq., M.A., St. John's College, Cambridge, Mathematical Master High School, rose and submitted the following resolution : — That the alarmingprevalence of teaching aud proceedings of a Romanising tendency, and the numerous defections of Minibters of the Church of England, have rendered necessary the formation of the ' Church of England Association for maintaining in Van Diemen's Land the principles of the Protestant Reformation ;' and that this Meeting and the Members of the Church generally are called upon to afford thpir zealous support to the Association , especially in the most important objecta of maintaining the proper independence of the Clergy, and of obtaining for the laity an equal participation in tlio administration of the affairs of the Church. He said, In oppo»ing teaching and proceedings of a Romanising tendency, I am not going to fall foul of the Pope and the avowed and conscientious piofessors of the Roman Catholic persuasion. Neither do we quarrel with the Puseyices merely because they hold opinions different from ours. We accord freely to them the exercise of the same right of prirate judgement as we claim for ourselves. But their offence consists in this — that, while they are in heart Roman Catholics, they prefer to be members of the Church of England, retain her livings, and by their insidious teaching, try gradually to undermine and supplant her good Protestant principles. I feel, sir, that I have a difficult duty to perform, and therefore I be-speak the forbearance of the meeting. I have to show that good grounds existed for the formation of the Association mentioned in the resolution. I understand that the Bishop in his charge yesterday assailed our Association with a stoim of rirtuous indignation. This is unaccountable. Are Protestant principles unpalatable to a Bishop of tho Church of England ? Are they at a discount here ? Or aie they unworthy of being maintained ? (Cheers.) Every man I meet and converse with seems to believe that Puseyism, either latent or open, exists amongst us. But yet the Bishop denies that any proceedings and teaching of a Romanising tendency are to be found amongst his clergy, and by letter calls upon the Association for proof. Now this denial amounts to nothing, unless the Bishop and we are agreed upon what constitutes such proceedings and teaching. Does lie deny the existence of Puseyite principles and practices amongst us? Does he repudiate Apostolical Succession, that key-stone of the arch of Tractariamsm 1 Does he acknowledge the right of private judgment in the clergy and laity ? Does he leave Baptismal Regeneration an open question ? Does he throw overboard the Fathers an-l tradition, and take Holy Scripture as the sole rule of faith and practice, in accordance with the 6th Article? Lastly, does he denounce ••Theopbilus Anglicanus?" No! Then this denial is a gratuitous insult to our understanding and judgment. Now, what is the cause of the unseemly squabbling and contradictory teaching in our Churches? Why are the sheep of the fold scattered ? Is it not the Chief Pastor himself who has brought the plague among the flock ? (Cheers.) I shall now, sir, say a few words respecting the independence of our clergy. A residence of four years in the largest Divinity College of the University of Cambridge bad led me to believe that there was much truth in the assertion of the good Dean Collet, that " the gate of ordination was too wide ; " but at the Antipodes I find this is reversed — the gate j of admission into the ministry of our Church is much too narrow for any but Pseudo-Protestants to enter thereat. (Cheers.) For what are the obstacles that stand in the way of an honest Protestant candidate for orders ? He must give up his private judgment, and believe by proxy, although he knows that perdition is to be endured in person, (cheers.) He must give a satisfactory answer to the question, " Do you hold the Gorham heresy?" And when he has squeezed through Dean Collet's gate in spite of these obstacles, he still has to submit to take a license liable to be revoked whenever the Bishop is offended by him. This arbitrary licence accounts for the fact, that at a recent meeting of the Chapter summoned by the Archdeacon, some clergymen were found prepared to assure their Bishop that thay regarded the Minutes of the Sydney Synod as " God's holy admonitions?" The Rev. A. Daveni'out here said, "I deny it." The Rev. W. Bedford informed the speaker that the phrase used was " Godly admonitions." Oh ! what is the difference between " God's holy admonitions" and "Godly admonitions?" (Cheers). I repeat, shuffling is the mark of a Puseyite ! (Long continued cheering followed this remark). Now, Sir, when we see such cringing sycophancy as this, how can we possibly respect clergymen placed in so degraded a position ? (Cheers). I have never regarded with much favour what is called the Voluntary System of supporting ministers of religion — it smacks toomnch of pure democracy for my taste ; but it is infinitely preferable to the unchecked despotism under which ou*clergy perform their ministerial functions. Our Association was told in yesterday's charge, " not to bear false witness against our neighbour." As a sot -off against this admonition, I would remind the pretended Successor of the Apostles not to infringe the injunction given by Peter, in the first Epistle General to tho Elders of the Church, u not to lord it over God's heritage." With these remarks, Sir, I beg to move the resolution which I have read. (Enthusiastic cheering followed Mr, PobsQu's speed)).

Mr. P>. lUi'vry, seconded the resolution, winch was put and earned unanimously. Josii'ii llont, Esq., proposed the seventh — the following resolution: — That, in the opinion of this Meeting, the adoption in tins Diocese of the following propositions is necessary to the peace and well-being of the Church, namely :■— ls 1 . That in the pioposed Assembly for administration of the affairs of the Church, a numbci of Lay Mi'inbois* of the Chinch, being themselves communicants, and chosen by tiie congregations of which they aio members, should form a component part of such Assembty ; that such Lay Members should not exceed in number that of the Clergy, and should equally with them exercise the right of proposing measures for adoption, and of deliberating and voting upon all subjects submitted to the consideration of the Assembly. 2nd. That the clauses lately introduced into the licenses undei which the Colonial Clergy hold their appointments should be erased, and the old form of licence be lestoied. The Church, he .s.iid, in support of the" lesolution, wanted peace ; he leferred to that portion of the Chinch of Christ, the Church of England in this colony. 1 lirough the discusbiona which had prevailed, Mr. Hone observed, the clergy in various paitb of the colony weie about to preach to empty benches. He did not, however, advocate peace at the expense of truth, and hoped that if any present were dm on away from that Church, they would not be driven by anything inconsistent with the Word of God. Mr. Hone expressed ln-> full concunence in what had fallen ftom the previous speakers w ith refeicnce to tho necessity of impioving the form of licences for the clergy. The resolution, which was carried unanimously, was seconded by J. D. Loch, Esq., of New Norfolk. Mr. Hone took the chair by acclamation. Mr. Nvtt then moved the eighth and last resolution : — That tho thanks of this Meeting bo presented to Thomas J. Knight, Esq., for his zeal and attention to the impoilant objects of this Meeting, and foi presiding on the present occasion j and that he be requested to transmit oopiea of the Resolutions now adopted to His Grace the Archbishop of Canterbuiy, and to the Right Honorable the Secretaiy of Slate for the Colonies, with a request that their Loulships' influence may be afforded to carrying- out the objects of this Meeting. The vote was carried by acclamation. Tho proceedings of the meeting having terminated, a blessing was pionounced by the Senior Chaplain, and the assembly dispersed.