General Assembly.

Colonist, Issue 63, 28 May 1858, Page 4

General Assembly.

LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL.

In the Legislative Council on Monday, the 19th April, the Council went into committee, on a "Bill: to authorise the Bishop of New Zealand to convey certain hereditaments and premises to Trustees, to be appointed in that behalf by the General Synod of the Church of England in New Zealand."

Mr. Swainson, in moving for the second reading of the Bill, said: Sir, in moving for leave to introduce this Bill I briefly explained to the Council the circumstances which had led to the application; and in now. moving that it be read a second time, I will.give.to the Council a short account of the measures which have been taken for organizing the members of the Church of England in . New . Zealand, and of the manner in which .that object-will be -promoted if the bill shall pass into law. .Simple as it appears to be, the measure now before the Council is calculated' to have an important bearing on the interests of a large portion of the community. Of the European population of the Colony, not less than onehalf, are members of the Church of England; of the professing Christians among the native population,. considerably more than onehalf are members of the church; and of the one hundred and forty ministers of various religious denominations now stationed in New; Zealand, seventy are clergymen of the Church of England. But however numerous they may be, the members of the -• Church of England, on being transplanted to a British Colony, find themselves in an ano- : malous position ; they neither carry with them thjß ecclesiastical laws of England, nor have any power of local ecclesiastical selfgovernment; and it was commonly believed, until very recently, that consistently with the provisions of tfie Act of Submission, the bishop, clergy, and laity of the Church of England in : a British colony could not even lawfully meet together for the purpose of making regulations for the management of their own ecclesiastical affairs; and until measures are taken expressly for their organization, the bishop, clergy, and laity of the church, instead of being a "body fitly joined, together by that which every joint supplieth,". are no more.than so. many.isolated, independent, and powerless congregations, as. inefficient for many important purposes as an army without a Mutiny Act or Articles of War. : In whom should the property of the church be vested ? and by whom should it be administered? On what principle should the patronage of the church be administered, and by whom should it be exercised? How shall discipline be maintained ?. and by what tribunal shall questions of false doctrine be decided ? Shall the clergy be paid by fixed incomes, or by ■a varying scale? And shall they ;depend, and to what extent, on; the contributions of the'congregations ? ; On these,: and on a' variety of other important subjects of immediate practical; importance, the members of a churdM in a newly founded colony, are altogether without either rule or guidance; and.they jbavei no other sepufity for" ihe maintenance of discipline but the arbitrary power of the bishop to grant or withhold; their license to preach. < " : The; government of the Church of England in this colony," recently wrote the Bishop of Melbourne, referring to Port Phillip, "is a pure autocracy *• *. *' while the colonial clergy justly complain of the insecurity of their tenure; men of high standing and ability in England, such as we especially require, are, fpr the most part, unwilling to accent employment where they would be subject to the arbitrary will of a single individual." The first movement on the part of the lay members of the church in this'country to ■obtain some system of synodical action took* place in 184$, wheii the outline of a plan was put forward., which received the support of a considerable, number of leading members of the church in the; various settlements. '« We find," said its promoters, "that we form the most advanced and remote outpost of the Church of England. There have also devolved upon us, in common with many of our countrymen* the Important duties of aiding in the foundation of a great nation, and in the moulding of its institutions. At the same time there are in .our immediate vicinity various heathen .nations, and even in the midst of us are; ( many native inhabitants of these islands wk°A av? not yet embraced the doctrines of Christianity* Moreover we, the European members of the, Church of England, have been collected from many'countries, and are settled in widely', detached localities; and thus, although we are bound together by a common faith, and haye common, duties to perform, we are' united bybburt r few:, of the usual ties of long .and familiar acquaintance, whilst there is no

system of local organisation 'which might tend to draw us together as members of the same Church. / We therefore fe6l ourselves called, from circumstances and from our

position, to vast responsibilities, and to the discharge,; df important duties, whilst we have,im% elements of weakness around and amongst"us: ' From these causes it is our, .earnest conviction that a'peculiar necessity exists for the speedy establishment .of some system; of Church Government .aniongst. us,", which,' by assigning to each order in the Church its appropriate duties, Wgnt .call forth the energies of all, and thus enable the whole body of the "Church most efficiently to perform its function's. 0 Meetings of Church members T vy-erfe after-: .wards.Jhejd in the various settlements to consider the principles oh which the members of the church should be organised for purposes, of, Church Government; and it .was found that on its leading features the ■ colonists were all but unanimous. It was

■agreed that the Governing Body of the Church, should consist, of the Bishop, the Representatives of the Clergy,, and 'the Representatives of the Laity:—that a majority of each of the three orders should be

necessary to all binding acts:—andUhat the bond of union-should'-be a strict adhe-

rence to the Doctrines and Ritual of the

mother Church. And on visiting England in 1854, the Bishop of New Zealand was authorised to move the Imperial Authorities to pass an act for establishing in this colony a system of Synodical action-based upon principles which had received from the colonists their almost unanimous concurrence. But' in 1854 all hope of Imperial legislation. was at an end. Representations of a similar character had previously been made to the Imperial Parliament by the colonists in Canada, Australia, and the Cape of Good Hope, but without effect; three bills were successively brought forward; in 1852 by Mr. Gladstone—in 1853 by ;the Archbishop of Canterbury—and ia 1854 by the Solicitor-General: but not one of them passed into law.' About this time a case was submitted for ' tire opinion of Counsel whether ths Act 6'f Submission did in fact extend to prevent the Bishops, Clergy, and Laity in a colony from meeting together for the purpose of making regulations for the management of their own ecclesiastical affairs ; and an opinion was given by three of the eminent Counsel of the day that; the act in question could, hot be construed to extend to a Colonial See; and action was immediately taken hi several of our colonies to establish some system .of Synodical action amongst the ; members £f tlie Church. It still remained, however, to be considered what course should be taken by Church members in thp colony of. New Zealand; and as I have already informed the Council, a General Conference was held in Auckland about a year ago, to take the subject into consideration. The 'Conference consisted as I have already stated, of the Bishop of New Zealand—the Bishop of Christehurch—sis Archdeacons, and two other clergymen, and seven laymen, the clerical and lay members having been elected fey Church members in the settlements of Auckland, Ne\y. Plymouth, Wellington, Neloon, and Canterbury. Two courses were open for adoption—either to apply io tho Colonial Legislature for an act enabling the members of the Church to make regulations for its government, which should bo binding on all the members of the Church in the colony—^or for members of the Church1 to associate themselves on the principle of voluntary compact. Upon consideration, the Conference agreed to the latter course: and proceeded to form a Deed of Foundation or Constitution, calculated to caiiy their views into effect; a copy of the Constitution is annexed to the Bill, and its main features may be stated in a few words. It provides that a governing body shall be established for the management of any church property which may be conveyed to it; that it shall consist of the three orders in the Church, and that the consent of each .shall be necessary to all binding acts, and that the Lay members be freely elected by the whole body of churchmen without exception, arid thai; it shall'have the power to make all such rules and regulations as may be necessary, for.the efficiency of the associated mpm^ of the Church. But materials for the foundation of the propocod system wfre still to be provided. As I stated on .'. a former occasion, nearly the whole of the real property of the Church' having become vested in the Bishop of'Nev? Zealand-r-and without legislative) authority he cannot transfer that properly to any other trustees—it was obvious that application would have to be made to the legislature for an enabling act; and the Conference accordingly - prepared a bill suited to promote the object, and appointed a standing committee to take the necessary measure^ for securing for it the sanction of the, Assembly. The bill now before the Council is the bill as framed hy ihe Conference, ' and it was in compliance with the request of the standing committee that I naye 1 undertaken to introduce it to the Council, i It is obligatory upon no one, but simply i permissive; it simply enables the Bishop! of New Zealand to iransfer, if he see fit, ' the church1 property nov/ held by rum, to trustees to be appointed by the proposed i governing body or General Synod. The plan adopted by the Conference including none' but^hose who voluntarily enrol themselves amongst its members—-it excludes none buUhose who do not desire to become parties to it—it can deal with no other property but that which may be voluntarily: conveyed—it directly auects none but those; who receive payment: of i£s funds—and it: leaves the ordinary rights of the members j 6f the Church altogether untouched. Itj is by no sieatfs improbable that a system! simpljr founded tinthe principle of voluntary compact may prove insufficient for the efficient organisation of the members of the> jOhurch—but it is at all ovents a s?ie and prudent, experiment. And if the proposed Church Synod shall profitably administer -the-property, that may. be conveyed to it, and if it shall wisely exercise the powerf proposed to^ be conferred upon it, it may b^e reasonably'expected that other Church property will from, time to time be added to the common fund-^-that an increasing number of the members of the Church will be! moved to take xm Active part in the management of its affairs—and that the' Measures of the recent Conference, if in! sufficient in themselves, will ultimately lead the establishment of a system of Church Government in this country which, by assigning to each order in the Church its appropriate duties, may call . forth the energies of all, and that. being gradually riveted by joints and bands haying nourishment ministered, and knit together, the, members of the Church of England: and New -Zealand may be formed into otic body—may be animated by one spirit-r----and be governed by one law—and thus become a fitting instrument for taking part in building up the native people of theseislahds/into a Christian nation, and in ex-' tending the light of the' Gospel td:the : heathen people of the Southern Seas. The hon. member concluded by moving the second reading of the bill. . On Thursday, the, ; Bili. passed, tlirough Committee; during the,discussion,upon iij his-Honor the Chief Justice delivered; the following speech:— '''"".." ■"

The Chief_ Justice regretted to find tiiriiself in opposition to the remaining,part of the bill. He" could not tell what might be the bpinions of other hon. members on the question, but was aware that a considerable proportion of* them were pledged to that, measure. If any differed* he wished some one had risen^ instead of leaving to him the painful duty of what might appear an isolated opposition. He regretted especially to oppose a bill introduced by his honorable and learned friend (Mr. Swairisbri), who had been to him a friend and counsellor, since his arrival in New Zealand, towards whbm he felt great obligation and regard, and of whom the House must have observed, I that, during its course of legislation upon the various billa before it, scarcely a suggestion, had been ; offered by: his honorable friend, which the House had not found an j improvement. 1 Perhaps, then, the Council would extend its indulgence while he (the G.J) explained why that subject: was novel to hirp, said how he became placed iin his then position. Since the Council separated on Monday certain documents had beeri^j supplied .to; him, which shewed that the' Constitution, adverted to in the 2nd and Srcl sections of that Bill, was not .assented to till the month, of June last. In ordinary; course, therefore, that Constitution and the proceedings which led id it would* not find their way into the English journals, till ho was leaving or had left England. He had: no means, therefore, of becoming informed upon the subject until his arrival here. But, upon landing in New Zealand"/ he found not tha most distant allusion,either in the public press or in private society, t!o that important measure for the Government of the Church. tTppn being called to tha* Assembly, anil entering that CJounciT, he heard not a whisper, upon the subject,: arid to that hour he looked in vain for any! expression of the wishes of the people by: petitions on that table. The notice, of mo;tiou by his honorable friend enlightened him but little, for that notice contained no mention of the Constitution according to which, it now appeared, the management of church property waa in future to b^|Jrßgu•lated, but simply informed the Ooun(|l:|hkt hifl hon. friend wished to introducei^ibiitlct. facilitate the transter of feeriain property from the Bishop of New Zealand ,to! other, trustees. itwasnoS until his hon. friend on Monday: last opened rthe subjepjt shat Qouncil that he (the C.J.) learn||ffhe : , true nature of that Bill. Then it waQ'.that : his hon. friend informed the Council the Bill was not a mere franofer of trusts bill, but a bill by means of which the Bishop, plergy, aiid Laity were to be organised, sound doctrine and discipline, maintained, the patronage of the Church distributed, tribunals erected, the clergy paid, and }the whole bogly of ihe Church goveice^.r'For his hon. friend, in then drawing a golden future of the unity of the Church to result from that measure, informed the Council, that nearly the whole of the real property of the Church had; become vested hi the Bishop of New Zealand, but reminded the Council that until thai property waa. transferredtQ the trustees conte-nipl&ied By th&t Bill, the basis of Church government wai y/anting*.. What course eoukl he (the C.J.) pui'scie ? ' Sad he at once left the Council, there being but six or eight rnemberc present, he would have appeared disrespectful to thehon. move*1, andio the Council, besides exposing himself to fnisrepresentation; if he remained, he must either vote fo? the bill,' o/ give Ajiileiit vote against it, or adopt the courso ac was then taking. Ought lie-io have opposed the second* reading ?' It was said he ought, and that having allowed the first section to pasa in committee;-:. sub sihntis, he oould no£ feasoaably object to the remainder of the bill. ■■■But as %o Opposing tlie second reading, hu did Hot wish io force himself,.in opposition to rtay measure, upon the Council: arid as to allowing the first section to pass, he approved ql .their excellent Bishop relieving himself from the burdensome management of the trust estates, and cared little'whether the: new Trustees were persons nominatedby the Bishop,. or by others in whom ; that excellent prelate reposed confidence, provided only that the trusts were preserved, cts he; assumed was the intention of the first sec- !j tion of the bill. It was in the second; section that mention was first made of the so-called Constituiton for the Government: of the Churchi. What, ihen,- was that Con-' stitution I Ilia hon.. friend (Mr.1 Swainsbn), had kindly favored him with a sight of varioua paper?; viz.,, a copy of "The Con-1 stitution " itself, the schedule thereto,, a. re-; port of certain proceedings out of which: iliat Constitution resulted, and lists of resolutions passed by a certain. Conference vi fefevencQ to the same. The second; section of the bill proposed that the new Trustees should be compelled to administer jtheuftrusts in accordance with that;Con3titu.tien,' and by the. laws of the CcnititittiohJ'%e Trustees were und^r the direction: of tha General .Synod. Tiiat Gensrsil Syripd;vyas first specifically mentioned in the third 'secj tion. But .he, would, by permission of the Council, Spare them a. double argumenti and read the second in connection'with the third. Now,: he: would.be, ,no;party .to trusting that .synod ;with. the-rnanagenient of church property. He was notoppos.ed ! to the synodical action of the church. He earnestly wished tocee that synodical action "established. He : would fafo me ilarge'r • powers conferred upon the Bishop, 1 he wculd strengthen the hands of the parochial clergy, he would gladly see proper tribunals erected to determine those controverted pointy of doctrine, which sometimes ran into J the deepest mysteries of Christianity, and' he would guard against the scandals which ' arose out of such enactments as the English Church Discipline Act. But for the man-' agement of large estates, he had no faith in General Synods. A general synod would only end (practically) in a compact ecclesiastical body. In such bodies, the dominant party of the church would reign supreme. Such bodies' might be entrusted with matters of doctrine, and even,' to some extent,, of discipline. rlf stirring questions were mooted, some of the' laity'inigHt be

; Induced to join their influence, but in the ' eyery day management of property the . laity soon became merged in the power of tHeij clergy: In'the earliest ages of the church, doubtless, the laity had their influence, but in what did it result ? What had passed at our own Reformation ? What had they of late years not witnessed in Spain, in Portugal, and still more recently in Sardinia? The legislators, such as those countries possessed,; had been compelled to interfere at last with a rough hand, and assert, on behalf of the laity and the State,.,their authority over the property of the church. It was all very well to say such evils would be prevented by the action of the laity, in General Synod assembled ;i but the answer was, you could not get; the laity to attend. The scheme looked well on paper; but, practically, the man of commerce, the man of letters, those engaged in the learned professions, and in the different occupations of the State, eouldnot be brought to attend; The laity were ; and evsr would be gradually withdrawn, a,nd ! iho General Synod would become an association of ecclesiastics, the ,endo\nnent A of that synod would end in ecclesiastical power and aggraridisemeni;, but the influence of the' laity woulclbecome a mere shadow.. .If that was true of large communities, it was especially so in a small population, distriIvbuted about among scattered hamlets, iso- | lated stations, and a few' little coast towns, as; in New Zealand- And how did the present Constitution propose to associate the laity to the control of the property of the church ? That Constitution comprised, besides its preamble, thirfcy-two: articles, of which the first six contained the fundamental provisions, while a schedule ofseren clauses iyas appended, embodying' certain specific.d trusts and powers. These, however, must all be read in connection with certain resolutions to which he would presently pAvert..',, But,- at the outset, this document was an earnest of tha future influence of the .laity,; and of.the spirit in vfhich the s Council might expect church pro-, perty w<su^ -probably.: be administered, under the direction of this particular synod. Ju addition to the two bishops and six archdeacons, members of the conference, whose, names pA'6 appended to the Gonstitu-*; tiori, J the Couucii would find the name** of two clergymen, and seven laymen; and of these laymen five if not sis lived in Auckland or its immediate neighbourhood.. Otago, he found, was'riot., intended to be of the .General Synod at all, for in his hasty review of the resolutions he did. not observe Otago mentioned, although he was informed it was one of the most thriving provincesin the colony. ; Turning to the constitution i itself, the Council would find that; its framers were riot content with the authorised version of the Scriptures, the Book of Common Prayer, and the 39 articles of the j church. He begged pardon. He was not' going to weary ths Council, by going j through the articles of that Constitution for | the government of the church. It was a ■ large subject, one which some hori. members present had more considered and;understood it much better than himself., -Be was compelled, however, ■. to ask the-Council to j read with him the Bth clause, which provi- r ; ded, inter- alia, that the first General Syji||k should consist of th# bishops aud of srtlf/ and so many members,-to be elected in such manner as the then Conference should prescribe. (His Honor read the Bch clause.) j Now, the first Synod would probably, de- \ tsrmine the character of the next. He :begged the Council therefore to turn with 'him to the resolution hy which the Conference had fixed'the standard of qualification, for those of the laity who should be allowed to vote. Every elector is to bo compelled to sign the voting paper as follows. (His Honor read. the voting paper proposed.) And thus the Council .',vould perceive' that, be'the parishioner ever so true and faithful & member of the church, be he a regular communicant,- a constant worshipper.at Divine service, let him combine the highest. intelligence with the most unsullied character,still he can never be permitted to have a voice in electing'even a member for that: (so called) General Synod, by whom the! property of the church is to be administered,; unless he consent to bind his conscience to; the laws of that Constitution. : There were; parts of that Constitution to- which many; persons might object./ Some might object,; I for instance, to the second; article, which provided that even the General Synod, \ which they were called upon to -set up, should never be permitted to accept, and 'consequently that the church in-New Zea-! land should never be permitted to adopt, ' any alteration of the formularies of I the church, although such alteration were sanctioned by the Crown, and adopted by the United Church of England and Ireland, unless the Synod and Church of New Zealand had also the consent of Convocation—many- men distrusted Convocation as at present constituted. What means the branch of the Church of England in New< Zealand possessed of getting herself represented in Convocation, whether her Bishops could gain admission iuto that body, or would find the doors of Convocation closed against them, he would not stop to enquire; although'he was not an entire stranger to the attempts made by certain colonial Dignitaries to obtain admission there, nor to the once projected applications for a' Mandamus, which however, he believed,, the Court of Queen's, Bench wero never invited to grant, or pained by refusing. But this he would say:—property held by trustees for the benefit of the Church, ought not to be applied at the discretion of afrieresection of that Church; and if that house were asked to place that property under lthe control of a representative body, those who asked snch powera should see that the representation was thrown open. Every bona fide member of the Church should be admitted to vote, or at all, events the church constituency should not be confined to those only'who would subscribe! the constitution- before the< house.' >He ,was aware it would be said - thejr left the rights of churchmen untotiched,- "and the 32nd Article would be

quoted* as if ..churchmen,, requireid forsooth the ;guarantee of: that General' Bynpilin behalf of their rights and'liberties.: JSjit what were the rights reserved ? The nteinbers of that r house r \Had".prpbaiily.y-t)een baptized; they ■ hacl, some of * them., been married, and all might in their: turn tie buried. But j^when that conference deprived all Churchmen, save those who subscribed that constitution, of all right ever to vote for a candidate of. that body, by whom the property, of. this Church was, to be managed,: the Conference cut them off from rignts which especially bound, them to the teriiis of that constitution, while the enjoyment of that, right was to a limited;class. Hebegged to asaure &c, House he. did not wish to treat the Bill before the House in any captious spirit; What. tap trusts, were, upon which their' excellent. Bishop helot, that property, property which the hon. mover described as the property of the Church, and which he (the Chief justice) ■ supposed the! Bishop himself considered he. held in trust for the Church, what these trusts^were the house was not informed. Mr. Swainson intimated that in some, out of he believed conyeyaricec, ;the words, were "for religious and charitable purposes." At, all erenta (said his Honor) the House must suppose that. property, which is to be managed under control of a General Synod of the Church, is now held in trust for that Church, and it was. the duty of that Rouse not to lend ita. assistance iii favor of a section of that, Church alone. He would not refer to the 13th and 14th Articles. They with several others might deserve comment. But by the '20th Article of tlie Constitution,1 Diocesan . Synods were to be efec^sd. Only let the House suppose that at some future day i; controversy arose like-that which, had so recently. vexed, the Church' in ! England, upon Baptismal Segeneraitioh, or ~ any other mysterious doctrine.- : Bid any man ia that House suppos-3 that the weaker side, it/ might: fee Biccese, would not be outvoted by; the majority in ByniJ^ and thus driven to appeal to Parliament for a share in the property of the church from which the SynoH, (in their opinion. unjustly) excluded; them • To/guard, against such difficulties^ the law might be -called in aid against any improper admini•stration of ; a trust, provided the legislature had.not placed that.trust and^he trustees who administer it-.out of control of the laws And this reminded himi that amongst other prpvisionc the Constitution claimed a -.right for the General Synod to constitute/its own Tribunals, besides a Court of appeal. Thus, he supposed, they were to have a Court for each province, with ah appeal Court, wholly independent of the Crown. It appeared to him then that the real object of this bill was, not as its title professed, to enable the Bishop to transfer those properties to trustees to be appointed by the Synod, but to place the property under the control of that Synod. Meanwhile its tendency vvas1 to stop Parliament from ever after exercising ita control over the church. It sought to raise ;a power superior; to Parliament, and toist the church above txie law. If this were liot thepfejecit, -thebiliwaswholly.unnecessary.: ; Whywould |not a • simple^. transfer of bill, with powers to perpetuate trustees, suffice ? ;He had no hesitation in saying, that, if his honorable friend would be/satisfied with even embodying in the bill the trustees clauses, in the schedule to that constitution, only worded, so a3 to protect the trustees from all interference (on the part of the Synod) with themselves in their -discharge of the trusts, he would withdaaw his opposition to the 2nd section of the bilK As to the 3rd section, however, it was1 wholly new. It was .neither required by the resolution of the Conference upon which this application was founded, nor did i's concern the Bishop's trusts, nor was it ever hinted at in the notice lor introducing that bill. He objected to it on, principle. Far from advising Parliament to repudiate all future control of church property, he would prefer seeing that property administered by a separate board under the sanction of Parliament itself. They might thus secure an equal, careful, and impartial management, wholly uninfluenced by narrow considerations. Holding such views he could not vote for any scheme which should have the effect of placing the church property under the control, direct or indirect,

of any Synod whatever. v