This eBook is a reproduction produced by the National Library of New Zealand from source material that we believe has no known copyright. Additional physical and digital editions are available from the National Library of New Zealand.
EPUB ISBN: 978-0-908329-23-6
PDF ISBN: 978-0-908332-19-9
The original publication details are as follows:
Title: Samuel Tarratt Nevill, first Bishop of Dunedin, 1871-1919, Primate of N.Z., 1904-1919 : with a short history of S. Paul's Cathedral, Dunedin
Author: Nevill, Samuel Tarratt
Published: Otago Daily Times and Witness Newspapers, Dunedin, N.Z., 1922
Samuel Tarratt Nevill
First Bishop of Dunedin, 1871 1919 Primate of N.Z., 1904-1919,
WITH A
Short History of S, Pauls Cathedral, Dunedin.
By Canon E. R. NEVILL, M.A., F.R. Hist. Soc Vicar of S. Paul's Cathedral,
¥ 1922.
DUNEDIN, N.Z
Primed by Otago Daily Times and Witness Newspapers Company, Limited,
1922.
PREFACE.
The late Primate left his journal of his work in New Zealand in my hands to see through the press. Owing to his death he was unable to completely finish what he hoped to be a complete story of fifty years as Bishop and Primate.
To this interesting and valuable record I have added my own account of S. Paul’s Cathedral and its origins, which form a large part of the Primate’s work. I have continued my account as far as the death of the Bishop.
To those who take an interest in the subject I should like to recommend an invaluable record by Mr R. B. Williams, now in the hands of the Chapter, of all the different donations, memorials, and gifts which belong to the Cathedral. Such a record is an invaluable possession for future reference.
My thanks are due to Sir George Fenwick, Mr Harris, and the staff of the “Witness” for much help and kindly advice in printing.
As to the “Diary,” with the exception of the American part of the journey in 1870, I have left it pretty much as the late Primate wrote it. I wished it to be a true human document, not merely a bowdlerised life of the Primate.
The times in which he lived were the days of the construction of the New Zealand Church—difficult days in many ways, with problems new to the clergy.
At Home the Church was still Erastian. No Bishop dreamt of Conference or Synod, and as far as power went, they were still autocrats in Convocation if not in Parliament.
The Church in Zealand was a return to the primitive independence of Ecclesiastical Provinces, a thing which even Selwyn had not fully realised. The late Primate, both at the Lambeth Conferences and the General Synods of New Zealand, fought the battle of freedom for his own Church against much ignorance, prejudice, and episcopal opposition from the then Archbishops of Canterbury and the then Bishops of London. This opposition was mainly due to the English ideal of a Bishop as a nominee of the Crown as in the Jenner case, and to an old rule which dated from the times of Charles 11. that all emigrants leaving England for colonies like America were under the Bishop of London, and that the Church of New Zealand and the Islands were really subject to English Episcopal control delegated for obvious reasons.
As to the Primate’s personal opinions 1 leave them as he expressed them. I offer no opinions on them, as they seem to me to be part of the history of the Church at that time.
Edmund R. Nevill
CONTENTS.
The Primate's Diary, 1871-1919 page
Early Days 5
My Call to the Episcopate 11
To New Zealand in 1870 12
Events Following Arrival in New Zealand 14
Otago and Southland 18
The Genesis of the Diocese of Dunedin 24
The Second Synod of the Diocese of Dunedin 33
The Return to England in 1871 and Work Accomplished there 39
From 1873 to 1878 47
Ecclesiastical Autonomy—The General Synod of 1874 65
Early Diocesan Work—lB74 to 1878 61
Lambeth Conference of 1878 77
My Visits to Tonga, Samoa, and Fiji 88
The Last Thirty Years 96
The Advent of Bishop Willis to the Friendly Islands 99
Election to Primacy 101
Bishop Nevill's Retirement 107
The Late Bishop Nevill 110
Tribute by the Bishop of Dunedin 112
Bishop Averill's Eulogium 114
Presbyterian Appreciation 115
Burial at Warrington 115
The Funeral Procession 116
Services at Warrington 116
The Vigil 117
S. Paul's Cathedral Church, Dunedin— Early History 118
The New Cathedral 122
The Harrop Window 127
History and Description of the Font in the Cathedral 128
Consecration 129
Consecration of the New Organ 130
Old Parishioners 131
SAMUEL TARRATT NEVILL
First Bishop of Dunedin, 1871-1919.
Primate of N.Z., 1904-1919
EARLY DAYS.
the origin of this record consists in the fact that my call to New Zealand, proceeding originally from the first Bishop of that country— George Augustus Selwyn—was at the formative period of the constitution of the Church here and in the colonies generally. It was a time of very ardent discussion of Church principles, which, I trust, will find some elucidation in the course of my narrative. There were also some special troubles connected with the earliest history of the Diocese of Dunedin which, after this lapse of time, may now be more fully explained. I flatter myself also that perhaps some of the incidents of my career may not be without interest and value in relation to the development of Church work in the South Pacific, which none other tnan myself could relate, and which may yet be of some importance in the future.
It: ’ s not unusual for writers of biography, and even of autobiography, to begin with some account of the family to which the subject of the writing belongs, but I do not propose to encumber mv page with genealogical matter dear to the inheritors of my family name. J
My brother, Edmund, and I walked daily to a school in Nottingham, kept by a Mr Herbert, a member of the Royal College of Preceptors, and whose school was subsequently known as University College. Here I learned a little Latin, but was unable, for many years to proceed to the University. I need say little more about my youth save that not having been set to prepare for any work or profession 1 had a good deal of spare time, which I spent in desultory reading m walking tours, and intercourse with families in the country round’
I was very fond of painting, both of landscapes and portraits and when about fifteen years of age I took a life-sized portrait of myself J? 7 ° l . sar some other things with me to London on a visit to my uncle William Nevill. I was by him introduced to Sir D. Maclise, then President of the Royal Academy, and to others. My uncle surrounded himself with artists and men of science. That versatile man, Edward Lear, originator of those quaint and amusing rhymes, afterwards known as limericks, was first brought into public notice by my uncle. I had always possessed a secret desire to become a clergyman, but thinking this out of the question. I did not declare my desire, but raised a little pocket money from time to time hv vnnniK crltf>moc
11
Early Days.
of my own, at one time making designs for a lithographic firm, and for some months I actually worked in a lace factory, where the inducement was not merely the small pay which I received, but the desire to understand how a design was transferred from the paper to the intricate works of a Jacquard machine. I continued this work throughout a whole winter, when, with snow upon the ground, I had to walk some three miles from my home to the factory, rising before 5 o’clock in order to be at the works by six. I took my breakfast in a workman’s cottage, and my luncheon I usually carried with me. I never regretted my close companionship with the mechanics and working people with whom I was thus associated. The mechanics were not only highly intelligent, but were usually men of high principles and quite good company.
At the age of 21 I was entitled to my share of a sum of money left by my grandfather, I. B. Nevill, to be divided between my brothers and my only sister, and so the opportunity seemed to have come to make preparation for studies for Holy Orders. I had been a good deal thrown into the company of the clergy, as my people having again moved nearer to Nottingham, and my mother—a daughter of George Berrey, Esq., of that place—being a very devout woman, we were acquainted with several of them. My father also — whatever his weaknesses, which were those of the gentry of his time—was a religious man, a regular church-goer, and communicant, it was therefore quite with their goodwill that I announced my determination so to use my little fortune. I was, however, afraid that my scholarship was inadequate for a University course, and, moreover, had heard so much about the expensiveness of it, that 1 accepted the advice of our vicar and became a student of St. Aidan’s Theological College, entering myself also at Trinity College, Dublin, as an out-resident student, for the purpose of taking a degree. At the latter institution, however, I only kept the terms of one year, not enjoying the crossings back and forth, as my sailing qualities were not at that time what they afterwards became. I took kindly to the study of Theology and Church History, and obtained the approbation of my tutors at St. Aidan’s, one of whom, the Rev. Canon H. Linton, M.A., Vicar of Birkenhead, and later Canon of Chester, had a daughter, who afterwards married my brother, Edmund, and he subsequently followed my example and became a clergyman. Finishing the course at St. Aidan’s, I accepted a Title to Orders from the Vicar of Ormskirk, Lancashire, and being ordained by the Bishop of Chester, was appointed as a Deacon to the sole charge of the village and district of Scarisbrick, within the parish of Ormskirk, but some nine miles from the parish church. The district included the great area of reclaimed land known as “the Moss,” an area of great botanical interest lying between Scarisbrick and Southport and extending for many miles along the coast to the north. This great work had been largely accomplished by the cutting of dykes and the making of paved roads through it. There were ancient hamlets upon the more elevated ridees of “the Moss” which must have been almost islands at no very
Early Days
7
distant times. I have often felt that my long and lonely rides over this rough district, with its many scattered hamlets, was something of a providential preparation for my work in a newly-settled land.
I will only add that as I lived in lodgings with working people it was a great relief to me to pay an occasional visit to Liverpool, only some 14 miles away, and to enjoy the society of certain friends I had made. On one of these visits I was introduced to a young lady from Devonshire. This led eventually to my marriage with that lady, the eldest daughter of J. P. Penny, Esq., of Heavitree, Exeter, and to my resignation of my Lancashire charge.
Soon after my marriage I determined to resume my purpose of studying for a degree, and we went to Cambridge for that purpose. We took a house on “Maids Causeway,” and I became a fellowcommoner of Magdalene College, the Master of which was the Hon. and 'Rev. Latimer Neville, who afterwards became Lord Braybrooke, and who became my life-long friend, and acted for a time as my commissary in England. He was a man of genial manners and affectionate disposition, as well as of considerable influence in the University. He held also the living of Heydon with Little Chisell, near his brother’s (Lord Braybrooke) great place at Audley End in Essex.
I had a love for natural science, and decided to study for that tripos, and in order to do this had to take up some additional subjects in the “Little Go,” as the first university examination was then called. As a Fellow-commoner I had the privilege of accompanying the Fellows into the “Combination Room,” the after dinner retiring-room, and as the old port wine days were by no means over I frequently spent long evenings in the convival company of distinguished men from other colleges whose talk was generally entertaining and often also instructive. Charles Kingsley became at this time Professor of Modern History in the University, and, as an old Magdalene man, very often dined with us, and being a voluminous talker, often kept us up till a late hour. Bubbling over with energy, as he usually was, he not infrequently overran his power of utterance, and I well remember one evening, at the time when he was engaged in the writing of his “Water Babies,” he sprang from his chair at about 12 o’clock exclaiming to me: “ M—m—m—my dear Fellow, the devil is waiting for some more copy. I must be off.”
I had too many friends and too many tastes to make success in the examinations very possible, and I kept a horse on which I traversed the country round. Being in Holy Orders, I was not infrequently called upon to assist the neighbouring clergy, riding sometimes into Suffolk on such errands. I pursued my scientific studies also largely in the open air, and as the paleontological department of geology was the most interesting to me, I was often to be found in the coprolite beds of the lower greensand formation near Cambridge, where the Saurian remains in bones and exuviae were accumulated to such an extent as to make them of great commercial value. I also watched the workmen in the Barnhill gravel pits, and picked up there not only a quantity
13
Early Days
of teeth of horses, but also the portions of those of elephants, and on one occasion a tooth of a rhinoceros. Professor Sedgwick, whose classes I attended sometimes, sent for me to accompany him on a trip to some place he wished to examine, and I was proud of the notice of the grand old man, often called the father of English geology, a personal friend of Cuvier and a loveable character. Other subjects which I took up for degree were Physics, Comparative Anatom} r , and a certain amount of Mineralogy and Crystallography as branches of Geology. Unfortunately for me, when my degree examination came, I found the Geological paper had next to no questions on Paleontology in it, which doubtless led to my only passing with second class honours, while my friends of the scientific societies to which I belonged had prognosticated higher things.
One or two country livings (save the name) had been offered to me about this time, but I did not accept them, though an invitation to take charge of a village in the Isle of Wight presented the attraction of beautiful scenery. Turning my back on these, however, I eventually took work in the potteries district of North Staffordshire, where smoke of such density was belched forth from innumerable chimneys as even to satisfy the Parliamentary definition of smoke -viz., that which entirely obscured the sun. Presented to the Rectory of Shelton, a parish adjoining Stoke-upon-Trent, the iron foundries of Etruria, I had a large population to minister to. The church, which was built to accommodate 2,500 people on floor and in galleries, was, alas, in so sad a state of dilapidation that on coming out of the church after my Institution one of the churchwards said in a jocular manner: “ It’s lucky we had a fine day!” and noticing my look of surprise, he added; "When it rains we put up our umbrellas in the service.” This was to intimate that the roof did not keep out the rain. I may add that though the church had been called the Cathedral of the Potteries from its size and commanding position which enabled it to be seen from afar, the battlements were broken down, and even the churchyard wall had fallen on the side which was higher than the main road. I was informed that even the bones of long-buried persons fallen into the street. The Potteries were a great metropolis of Wesleyanism. The Kilhamites, or “ New Connection Wesleyans,” originated in Shelton, and their largest chapel was in the parish. The mode of raising money for church purposes was at that time by a church rate levied b}- a meeting of parishioners in Vestry Assembled; but as every adult person was regarded by the law as a member of the Church of England, to whatever body of religious separatists he might belong, it was considered quite hopeless to obtain a rate for the repair of the church or its surroundings, hence the ruinous condition I have described was allowed to continue; notwithstanding that many of the graves in the churchyard were those of deceased members of leading dissenting families. This was the state of things I had to face on entering upon my work. It is notable that the member of Parliament for the borough was Mr A. J. Beresford-Hope, who, himself a strong churchman, about this time introduced and carried through Parliament a Bil
9
Early Days.
for the abolition of church rates. It is worthy of remark that, though by this measure persons who refused to acknowledge themselves members of the Church, were thus relieved of all responsibility for her support, yet were allowed to retain their right to bury their dead in the churchyards of the national Church.
I have spoken of the great size of Shelton Church. It was one of those built by the very large grant made by Act of Parliament for the building of churches at a time when the nation herself was stricken with alarm by the presentation of statistics which set forth the enormous increase of population and the fact that it had far outgrown the seating accommodation of existing churches. In the spiritual deadness of the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries very few churches had been built, while the growth of commerce and manufactures had given support to this rapidly increasing population in large towns. It was this state of things which had given such impulse to the zeal of the Rev. John Wesley and others. Ignorance, immorality, and crime had abounded, the revelation of which came as a shock to the national conscience. Any who wish more particularly to recognise what the condition of the people then was will find abundant evidence of it in the valuable record of two hundred years’ work of the Societ}' for Promoting Christian Knowledge, published in 1898, Doubtless the efforts and influence of Wesley had done much to revive the sentiment of religion among the people, but the direction taken by his followers eventually became actively antagonistic to the Church in the Potteries district. Hence this great church, which had been erected out of this one and only Parliamentary grant for church building, had been allowed to fall into such decay, that to avoid the expense of keeping it all in repair a wall of boards had been erected about the middle of the church so that only half of it was in use when 1 took charge.
The River Trent, in whose broad and rapid stream I had so ofter bathed, in Nottingham, was the boundary of Shelton parish on one side, but as a mere brook which, passing into the next parish, gave its distinctive name —viz., Stoke-on-Trent. The Rector of this parish, my immediate neighbour, was the Rev. Sir Lovelace J. Stamer, Bart an excellent clergyman, and my very good friend. He devoted the very large income of his living (£4,000) to the development of Churcl work in the building of new churches, and in other ways seeking tc overtake the needs of the large population. I sought to do my part by the restoration of the great church, the condition of which I have described. I summoned a meeting of parishioners, to which no one came except one of the churchwardens. They said the work was toe great, so 1 announced one Sunday that on and after the following Sunday the services would be held in the schoolroom until furthei notice, and I immediately set men to work to open the eastern wali of the church with a view to the erection of a chancel for which I had prepared the plans. The chancel of a church in England being regardec as within the rights of the Rector.
This created plenty of stir on the subject, if no very deep interest in it. One parishioner, of well-known “ Low Church ” views, mounted
Early Days.
15
his pony and, riding round the parish, asked those whom he met what tne Rector was going to do? A waggish churchwarden whom he encountered replied: “O, haven’t you heard? The Rector is going to build chancels all round the church!” After that I soon got a public meeting, in which I made the offer to build and furnish a new chancel myself on condition that the people would restore the church and substitute open oak seats in the place of the large square pews with seats all round them and closed doors which were then in vogue. After nearly three years of arduous toil and many troubles this work was accomplished, and for the rest of my time at Shelton I had good congregations, and was eventually able to maintain four curates in aid of the parish work.
In the year 1867 the good Bishop John Lonsdale died. He had always been very kind to me. Among other things he laid the foundation stone of my new chancel, and addressed a public luncheon on the occasion, which helped much to calm the minds of my people. There was no little anxiety as to who was to be his successor, and I had the following story from one whose position gave some authority to it. Lord Derby—known as the Rupert of Debate—was Prime Minister at that time, and he is reported to have suggested the name of a certain Dean to Queen Victoria for the Bishopric of Lichfield. The Queen was much attached to Dean Stanley, and said “No, my Lord, if it is to be a Dean at all it shall be Dean Stanley,” to which Lord Derby, himself a Stanley, replied: “Then, if it pleases Your Majesty, it shall not be a Dean at all.” The story goes on to say that Lord Derby afterwards mentioned Bishop Selwyn, who was then in England to attend the first Lambeth Conference, and suggested that the Queen should invite him to dine with her, reminding her that Selwyn had once been curate of the parish church of Windsor, and spoke of his work in New Zealand. The result of this was that the Queen told the Bishop that it would be a great obligation to her if he would accept the Bishopric of Lichfield. The Bishop answered that Her Majesty’s wishes were a command to him, and he had no other course open to him but to accept, though he would rather go back to New Zealand. I was present at the enthronement of Bishop Selwyn in Lichfield Cathedral, and thereafter became well acquainted with him, and it was a fateful acquaintance for me.
Soon after taking possession of his See, Bishop Selwyn set out for New Zealand to preside over the General Synod of 1868, to resign his Bishopric of New Zealand, and to divest himself of the considerable amount of Church property, which he held in trust, as a “corporation sole,” I possess several letters from him written about this time in which he signed himself “G. A. Lichfield and New Zealand.” Surely an unique signature, since it represented the holder of two antipodean bishoprics.
It was at this General Synod of 1868 that the See of Dunedin was constituted, and it is observable that the enacting statute, which separated the then distinct civil provinces of Otago and Southland from the Diocese of Christchurch, also provided that the new Diocese
Early Days
16
should be under the jurisdiction of the Bishop of Christchurch “ UNTIL HIS SUCCESSOR SHOULD BE LAWFULLY APPOINTED.” This arrangement was made under the presidency of Bishop Selwyn notwithstanding tne fact of the consecration of Biship J. L. Jenner by the Archbishop of Canterbury two years before, intentionally for the Bishopric of Dunedin, A Diocese’WHlCH DID NOT THEN EXIST.” Bishop Selwyn had done his best* without avail, to get over this mistake which had been made.
Soon after his return to England, Bishop Selwyn made great efforts to get an approach to the method of synodical government established in English Dioceses. Many meetings of clergy and leading laity were held to promote this object, in which, notwithstanding the Bishop’s clear explanation of how such a measure would tend to liberalise and vitalise the Church, he was somewhat violently opposed by a certain section of both clergy and laymen. I was invited to attend and speak at several of these meetings. The opponents were especially alarmed by the name Synod, which they appeared to be convinced meant popery, and which word they commonly pronounced Sy-nod. On one of these occasions the Bishop caused some amusement among the clergy who were familiar with Greek by proposing that so terrible a term should not be used at the title of their meetings, and suggested tne word “ Conference ” instead; but putting the question to the vote he pretended to be uncertain as to the proper pronunciation of the objectionable word. “ Those in favour of the word S—s—,” said he, until laughter ensued at the hesitation, and then he added: “ I am afraid I must say ‘Synod.’ ” But “Conference was adopted by the meeting. Diocesan Conferences came to be recognised title of the annual meetings finally agreed upon.
My Call to the Episcopate.
It may have been the Bishop’s recollection of my efforts in support of the establishment of these conferences as recognised aids in Church work and government which led to his addressing to me a characteristicletter soon after Bishop Abraham resigned the Diocese of Wellington in order to accept the Bishop’s invitation to aid him in the administration of his new and populous Diocese of Lichfield. The letter ran as follows:—“ If you would like to be Bishop of Wellington send in your name to for submission to the Synod of the Diocese, which will meet before long to elect a successor to Bishop Abraham.” My reply to this letter was in these terms:—“ Without pretending to say nolo episcopari, I am certainly not going to send in my own name to any Diocesan Synod under the sun.” The rejoiner to this was: " You are quite behind the times, everybody is a candidate for a Bishopric now-a-days. However, come over to Lichfield” —naming a date —“and we can talk the matter over.” On my presenting mj'self on the appointed day, I found the Bishop closely engaged with a deputation from a parish in Wolverhampton, which had suddenly
17
Early Days
appeared to lay their trouble before him. Receiving me for a few moments the Bishop said: “ Go for a walk with Bishop Abraham, who will explain the whole matter to you, and come back to lunch and tell me what you decide upon.” We walked for an hour or more up and down the path by “the pool” as far as St. Chad’s Church and back, and it was explained to me, among other things, that the Synod would probably offer the Diocese to Archdeacon Hadfield, who had formerly declined the offer of the See on account of ill health, and Bishop Abraham thought it likely that he would do so again, and if so the Synod would find itself in some difficulty, hence the idea of suggesting a name.
Having mentioned in conversation during lunch that my wife had brothers in New Zealand whom she had not seen for some years, Bishop Selwyn at once said, “ Well, why not take a trip to New Zealand? You have four good curates in your parish; you can leave the senior curate in charge, and I can give you a year’s leave of absence. It will at all events do you good.” The climate of the Potteries had somewhat injured my health. I repeated this suggestion to Mrs Nevill on my return home, and it was eventually determined that the visit to New Zealand should be made. This was in the spring of 1870, and in July of that year we commenced our journey; but as circumstances which occurred in the course of it were of some interest, I will make the history of it the subject of a separate chapter.
To New Zealand in 1870.
The opening of the transcontinental railway across America—viz., from New York to San Francisco—and the opportunity thus afforded of seeing so much of the world’s surface, proved a sufficient attraction to cause us to decide upon taking that route, notwithstanding that there was at that time no established line of communication from San Francisco to New Zealand. I knew, however, that boats ran pretty frequently from thence as far as to Honolulu, and that there was little doubt of our finding a vessel going from there to New Zealand before very long. In July, therefore, we took the Cunard steamer “Scotia” from Liverpool to New York. The greater number of our fellowpassengers were Americans on their return from visits to Europe. I specially mention a Sir Willoughby and Lady Jones, however, because we afterwards became acquainted with the brothers of that Norfolk Baronet. The one was Archdeacon Jones, whom I found in Honolulu, in charge of the Anglican Diocese of the Hawaiian Islands, and the other, Captain Fitzhardinge Jones, with whom, and his family, I subsequently became intimate in Dunedin. I may here mention that an encumberance, and one which gave me great trouble both on train and on steamer, was a box of plants which Bishop Abraham had asked me to convey to his friend, Mr Ludlem, of the Hutt, near Wellington, a great florist, and the plants were seedling rhododendrons and roots of water lilies; in each case
Early Days.
18
the first introduction of those plants into New Zealand. I may interrupt my story to say here that by dint of tips to railwaymen and sailors I got the plants watered from time to time. The rhododendrons died, however, and I thought the lilies would have perished also, not from lack of water, but from excess of it, for some sailors observing the care with which I watered these plants from time to time in the box which I had lodged on the top of a deck-house, thought it a joke to turn the hose upon them and save me the trouble, as they said, of carrying water to them. I finish this story by adding that though, when I at length gave these lilies to Mr Ludlem, there was no sign of green about them, nevertheless they eventually put forth fresh leaves, and Mr Ludlem was able to inform me afterwards that I was to be known as the introducer of the water lily into New Zealand.
On pursuing our journey to San Francisco, instead of going back to the station at which we had left the railway line, we decided to take the road through the pine forest which climbed up to “ Summit Station ” at the further end of the snow sheds which protected the line from the winter snows. For this purpose we hired a buggy and pair of horses. At one place a landslip had brought down some pine trees, which lay across the road. I thought all further progress was stopped, but merely calling to us to “hold on tight,” our driver applied his whip and urged his horses on, the active animals leaped upon the boles of the trees and dragged the buggy after them, and so, with many a bump and change of angle, we were carried over. This was my first experience of the value of leather springs, which many a coach journey in New Zealand afterwards further proved to me.
I have said the railway had not been long built, the labour of its construction had been largely accomplished by gangs of Chinamen. We found our driver had the intense hatred of these people which so many who boast of a higher civilisation—to say nothing of a purer religion—entertain towards them. This dislike springs in great measure from the fact that the Chinaman is content to work for longer hours and for a smaller wage than the man of British origin will do. Pointing with his whip to a depression in the ground as we neared the station our jehu exclaimed in strong language: "There! there’s about 50 of the d d devils in that hole.” He further explained that there had been a massacre by the American workmen, and, in his opinion, “ a good thing, too.” We stayed some days in San Francisco at one of tue large hotels, and in the course of our visit made the acquaintance of Bishop Kip, of that city. Finding that a small steamer, called the Ajax,” was about to proceed to Honolulu, we took our passage by her to that place. Arriving at Honolulu, we were kindly invited to stay at the residence of Mr May, a merchant of the Sandwich Islands, who had travelled with us, and whose generous hospitality we enjoyed for some time.
Of the voyage from the Hawaiian Islands to Auckland, I need say very little. We had a very agreeable company of fellow-passengers, but a most disagreeable cargo. No one without experience would imagine that the commodity used for sweetening everything could be
12
Early Days
so offensive. We were laden with sugar, and before very long it drove us out of our cabins to beds made upon tables or on to the deck outside. The chemical effect of the noisome effluvia was to turn all the white paint of our cabins to a black substance which ran down the walls. The only incident of note, however, which occurred on our way, was the snapping off of our masts in a squall which we encountered. The vessel was very old, and I believe that this was her last voyage.
Events Following Arrival in New Zealand
A distinct stage in my personal, and also in my ecclesiastical history, is to be dated from the time of my arrival in New Zealand, and this event took place early in September, 1870. I was met by Bishop Cowie and Sir William Martin. I had been in company with the former less than a year before at Stafford, when Bishop Selwyn, who had then only recently returned from his last visit to New Zealand,, made the offer of the Diocese of Auckland to my friend—the Synod of Auckland having delegated its choice of his successor to Bishop Selwyn himself. Sir William Martin, the Chief Justice, who had heard of me from Home, invited me to his residence, situated on the shore of Tararua Bay, where Bishop Selwyn had landed and knelt in prayer about 28 years before. Mr Swainson’s house was close by, and he had also aided Bishop Selwyn in his constitutional work, and was the Solicitor-General of the Colony. I soon learned that Archdeacon Hadfteld had been offered, and had accepted, the charge of the Diocese of Wellington, so after a most agreeable visit with Sir William and the charming Lady Martin, Mrs Nevill and I took lodgings situated just opposite to the Government House, Auckland, then occupied by Sir George Bowen, the Governor. Sir George and Lady Bowen, who was a Greek, were both highly cultivated persons and of most agreeable manners, and we enjoyed their society. I preached at St. Mary’s, Parnell, and at other churches in Auckland and the neighbourhood, and we made excursions into the surrounding country. When the time came for the Bishop of Auckland to go to Wellington for the Consecration of Archdeacon Hadfield, he asked me to accompany him, and to act as his Chaplain on that occasion. This I was glad to do, and on arrival there renewed by acquaintance with Bishop Suter, of Nelson, whom I had formerly invited to my Staffordshire parish to plead for the needs of his diocese. I also met for the first time in Wellington Bishop Harper, of Christchurch, the Primate, and the Bishop of Waiapu —Bishop William Williams—one of the original missionaries to New Zealand. The consecration took place on Sunday, October 9, 1870, and was the first occasion on which an alteration was made in the Ordinal by the substitution of a Declaration of Obedience to the authority of the Primate and his successors in place of the Oath of Canonical Obedience to the Archbishop of Canterbury. The General Synod of 1874 enacted a Canon, which ratified the making of certain necessary alterations in the formularies of the Church; notwithstanding the declaration made in the Fundamental Provisions of the Constitution, to which I propose to refer more fully later on
Early Days
Taking lodgings in Mulgrave Street with a couple who hailed from Heligoland, we were soon called upon by the principal residents of Wellington, amongst whom I cannot forbear to mention Judge Johnson and his wife, a lady possessing in equal measure the attractions of personal beauty and cultivated manners. To these and to a good many other Wellingtonians we were the bearers of letters of introduction from Bishop Abraham. We had, however, the less need to present these, because the persons to whom they were addressed were soon among our callers. Mr Ludlem came to relieve us of his box of plants, of which I have before spoken, and we were invited to see his beautiful grounds and garden a few miles from Wellington on the Hutt River.
The farm belonging to Mrs Nevill’s brother was situated near Castle Point, and she, being anxious to see him as soon as possible, started alone in a very small coasting steamer which was to call at that point on the coast, while I fulfilled an engagement elsewhere. Unfortunately she encountered a gale of such force that the little vessel was unable to make the stoppage, and was carried right on to Napier, which she reached after two days of tossing about instead of only the few hours’ voyage which she expected. She was most kindly received by Archdeacon and Mrs Leonard Williams, son of the then Bishop, who himself subsequently became Bishop of Waiapu. The loving attention Mrs Nevill received at their hands was never forgotten by her, and when presently a steamer was found bound for Wellington she returned thither without having accomplished the object of her journey. This led, after a time, to my hiring a small horse and “buggy” wherein to make our way overland as far as Masterton, which was at that time as far as we could drive in the required direction. We had to cross the Rimutaka range of mountains, and were in some danger as we neared the summit, the force of the wind being there so great and the road so narrow that it seemed highly probable that we should suffer the fate of being blown over, which had happened to travellers more than once. Keeping my little horse’s head to wind and urging him on at dangerous corners, we at length reached the farther side, and were not sorry to put up for the night at the small township at the foot of the hills.
In due course we arrived at Masterton, and being pleased with the surrounding scenery, determined to stay there for some days, and from thence to make trips to the homes of friends of Bishop Abraham, whom he had particularly desired me to visit. Among these were a Mr Valentine Smith and “Parson Andrews,” a man whom old New Zealanders will remember to this day. A man of abounding energy and great ability, a scholar, a member of Parliament, and large sheep farmer, though not altogether forgetful of his clerical office. He had once held a sheep station on the Waitaki, in Otago. To visit these good people living in the Wharehama district, I left Mrs Nevill in Masterton, and, accompanied by Dr Boor, afterwards of Nelson, took horse for the purpose. Dr Boor was unable to start until somewhat later in the afternoon, which prevented our reaching a treacherous Raupo swamp
20
21
Early Days.
we had to cross before darkness had fallen. There was only one safe track across this swamp, and as the Doctor was doubtful of finding it, we climbed back on to the steep hill we had just descended and “cooed” our best to attract the attention of the owners of an accommodation house which lay at a short distance on the other side of the swamp. Happily, after a short time, we succeeded, and a man came with a lantern and took his position on a point at the further side of the swamp to which we had to make our way. Reaching the bank on the other side my rather small horse had much difficulty in leaping on to the solid ground, and I narrowly escaped a sousing in the mire.
I spent a Sunday with the family of Parson Andrews, and at hi request took the service at a hamlet called Tainui, where he usual!' officiated himself as a volunteer for the benefit of settlers.
Leaving Mrs Nevill in Masterton, I set off for Castle Point to let her brother know where we were. I found him at the end of my 40mile ride, trying, by himself, to round up a small mob of cattle he wanted to yard, but which were constantly escaping into patches of bush. Seeing me approaching he exclaimed: “ Oh, just help me with these beasts!” and I had to dash about up hill and down dale like a practised drover till we had conquered the reluctant animals.
On our return to Wellington we found the Ruamahanga, a considerable river near Masterton, swollen by rains. The weekly coach did not start until two hours after the usual time, and to allow for a further subsidence we did not attempt it until more than another hour afterwards; even then, on reaching the mid-stream, I found the horse was swimming and the buggy was afloat. I stood up and urged the horse on lest our carriage should swing round and we should be carried away. Happily the horse soon found his feet again, atad we suffered nothing worse than the wetting of clothing and baggage.
We stopped at a little accommodation house about 20 miles from Wellington on the Saturday evening, and resolved to spend the Sunday there. On the afternoon of that day Dr (afterwards Sir James) Hector, with some companions, drove up, and as they stayed a while to rest and feed their horses, I explained to the Doctor, whose acquaintance I had made, that I proposed to hold a short religious service for the men I had found at a saw-pit not far distant, and who had occupied the morning in washing their clothes. The Doctor and his party said they would gladly form part of my small congregation, and so we went into the bush, and all who had gathered together arranged themselves on logs about the saw-pit, and I took up my place opposite, and in the little clearing, with pines and tree-ferns for a background, made a selection of prayers, read a lesson, and gave a short address to a quite reverent and attentive congregation. Such little missionary services I had already taken on previous occasions, once in a railway car as we were being carried by train across the American continent, and both then and afterwards in many a sheari(ng-shed in New Zealand I have found that men who seldom or never present themselves to take part in the worship of God in a church will not only attend such special
Early Days
22
services, but willingly assist in making such suitable preparations as circumstances permit for the more fitting celebration of them. Perhaps in our larger cities and towns we have hardened down too fixedly into the unbroken order of the Sunday services two or three times a day, while at no great distance there are peoples with no religious services at all.
I was glad to pay a short visit to Nelson, especially because I was warmly attached to Bishop Hobhouse, formerly Bishop there, who had frequently visited me at Shelton, and I had also received an invitation from Bishop Suter, who had succeeded him. Arriving very early one lovely morning I walked from the port to the little city, and stood upon the church hill at 5 o’clock in the morning much admiring the scenery and also the good taste and foresight of Bishop Selwyn, or whoever it was, who secured so noble a site for the future cathedral. We spent a day or two at Bishopsdale, a beautiful property purchased by Bishop Hobhouse, who had built a suitable residence thereon, which whole estate, together with other property, he presented to the Diocese on his retirement.
Crossing over to Wellington, we proceeded thence to Christchurch, arriving in Ljdtelton on the morning of Christmas Day. Attending divine service in the morning, we were afterwards invited to a midday dinner by the Rev. Francis Knowles and his hospitable wife. It was to us an illustration of colonial life to find that the good lady had left an amply provided Christmas dinner— a principal feature of which was a suckling pig—to cook itself, while she attended to her religious duties. Their little eldest son, Walter, had a place at the table, seated in his baby high-chair. Both he and his father became subsequently clergy of my Diocese. At this time, however, I had no expectation of remaining in New Zealand, but thought to fill up my leave of absence by seeing as much as I could of it, and in particular I was desirous of being present at the forthcoming meeting of the General Synod, to be held on February I, 1871. The Synod was expected to be a more than usually important one, and I was very desirous of observing the working of that governing body with a view to seeing how far that working was applicable to the condition of the Church at Home.
Persons only familiar with Christchurch as now existing will probably be surprised to learn that what is now the centre of the city presented at that time almost a rural appearance. I made a sketch of a large wooden flourmill worked there by the waters of the Avon, not very far, I think, from where the Cathedral now stands. There had certainly been considerable advance since the condition of things which caused so much consternation to the mind of dear Bishop Harper when he arrived, a full-fledged Bishop from England, to take charge of his city. It is on record that after having been driven over the Port hills, then the only way of arriving from Lyttelton, and having for a long time possessed his soul in patience, he at length addressed uie question to his driver: “When shall we arrive in Christchurch?” To which he received the astonishing reply: “ Your Lordshio is now just about in the middle of the city.”
23
Early Days
While in Christchurch I made the acquaintance of Dean Jacob and others who had taken a very prominent part in the discussions connected with the formation of the Church Constitution. Among these was Archdeacon Willock, whose friendly invitation to visit him a: Kaiapoi I gladly accepted, not only because he was one of the pioneer clergy of Canterbury before the appointment of a Bishop there, but also because he was a Fellow of Magdalene College, Cambridge. He was a strong man, and I learned a good deal from him about the early constitutional controversies. I also greatly enjoyed his racy anecdotes and warm hospitality. Another Fellow of Magdalene College I was driven out to see was Mr Raven, a man whose portrait I had seen in the College “Combination Room.” I made the acquaintance of many leading churchmen in Canterbury whose friendship I enjoyed for years, but we did not stay in Christchurch very long as the time fixed for the meeting of the General Synod was approaching. We embarked in a little coasting steamer called the “Maori,” which contained only one cabin, and this was only assigned to the use of the only two ladies on board—viz., Mrs Nevill and the eldest daughter of the Rev. Algernon Gifford, then in charge of Oamaru. Our arrival in Dunedin then was within the first month of the year 1871,
Otago and Southland.
That part of New Zealand which was constituted a new Diocese by the action of the General Synod of 1868 and called the Diocese of Dunedin comprised the civil provinces of Otago and Southland together with Stewart Island and “adjacent islands,” whatever that may mean. The total area may be roughly regarded as about the size of Ireland. The physical features of the country, moreover, render large parts of it difficult of access. Mountain ranges too high to cross, and rockbound rivers too swift to ford, made travelling in the days before railways and bridges always labourous and frequently dangerous. Even when coach roads succeeded horse tracks, the dangers were not lessened, as sharp corners had to be turned at full speed, often at a high elevation, with a death-dealing precipice within a few inches, and often a treacherous river hundreds of feet below. Besides lesser rivers, the whole country was intersected from north to south by the three large rivers, the Molyneux, the Mataura, and the Waiau, the former and the latter issuing out of immense lakes, themselves many miles in length. In the extreme west the impenetrable mountains in their snow-capped glory were pierced only by long arms of the sea forming the sounds, or fiords, which, overhung by peaks of from 7,000 ft to 10,000 ft in height, exceed in majesty those of Norway, familiar to English tourists. The Southland Province, though it contains the beautiful mountain mass of the Takitimos, is generally of lower level, and now forms a farming country of great beauty, though in the early days, with its extensive plains covered with a dreary brown tussock, and its frequent swamps, it was much less inviting. Stewart
Early Days
24
Island (Rakiura, or Red Heavens), separated from the mainland by Foveaux Strait, is about as far distant as Calais is from Dover, and though celebrated for its beauty, has not even yet been settled beyond a few points, with its neighbouring island of Ruapuke (two hills), was at that time the home only of a small band of Maoris whose head chief, Topi, was the successor of Tuhawaiki, had also some possessions on the mainland. This Topi was the son of the brave chief, of the same name, who brought to an end the career of that renowned marauder, Te Rauparaha, whose raid with his followers from Otaki and Kapiti, in the North Island, had carried desolation and slaughter down to the extreme south. It is to the honour of Topi and his people that, in spite of the terror which the name of Te Rauparaha excited everywhere, they crossed over from their islands and met the conquering invader, defeated and overthrew him.
I may now turn to the religious history of this part of New Zealand prior to the establishment of the Diocese of Dunedin. This can best be gathered from two sources—viz., the Memoirs of the Rev. J. F. Wohlers, Lutheran Missionary at Ruapuke, written by himself, and the Diary of Bishop Selwyn. I have studied the question of to whom the honour^ belongs of being the first to introduce Christianity into the south of New Zealand with the greater care, because that question has been the subject of public discussion, and I think I am able to give an accurate and impartial account of the matter. There is, I think, no doubt that the first to carry some account of the Christian religion to the extreme south were the Natives themselves. The missionaries of the extreme north often learned with extreme surprise that through tribal relationships, or even by captives taken in tribal wars, getting back to their homes, the new teaching had been, however inadequately, spread to very distant places. An instance of this is found in the case of Ripahau, a liberated slave who, in the Providence of God, became the remote instrument of the conveyance of the knowledge of the Gospel not only to the southern parts of the North Island, but to the Ultima Thule of New Zealand itself. I take my account of this man from the before-mentioned Church history by Dean Jacobs. He says: Ripahau, a southern Native, after living for some years in the Bay of Islands, set off in quest of his relatives. At length he reached Otaki, where Te Rauparaha was living with his son, a youth of great intelligence.” The Dean then relates that young Rauparaha was “ intensely excited by the arrival of this stranger, and inquired of him as to what was going on in the Bay of Islands, where the missionaries were, and in particular he wished to acquire the wonderful art of reading.” His cousin and bosom friend, Te Whiwhi, shared all his eagerness, and presently they were joined by ten others, “but as Ripahau had only one book, a prayer book, and no paper or slates, tl.eir difficulties were great. Later on a party arrived from Rotorua who possessed another prayer book and part of the Gospel of St. Luke, the remainder of which had been used for cartridges. To gain more quiet these young men crossed over to the island of Kapiti, opposite to Otaki, where they lived for six months, and their earnestness in
25
Early Days
study may be gathered from the record of the young chief’s own words; ‘We learned,’ he says, ‘every day, every night. We did not he down to sleep. We sat at night in the hut all round the fire in the middle. Whiwhi had part of the book and I had part. Sometimes we went to sleep upon the book, then rose up and read again.’ The cousins then resolved to travel up to the Bay of Islands in the hope of obtaining a missionary priest to live at Otaki. Reaching at length the mission station, the Rev. Henry Williams (afterwards Archdeacon) was so impressed by their earnestness that he expressed the desire to return with them. It was, however, eventually decided that his brother, the Rev. William Williams (afterwards the Bishop of Waiapu), should accompany them back and place as their missionary the Rev. Octavius Hadfield, who had come out to New Zealand for his health, and was then only in Deacon’s Orders. On hearing the pleas of these young men, Hadfield had sprung up saying, T will go; I know that I shall not live long, and I may as well die there as here.' ” It seems strange to relate that it was he whose consecration as Bishop of Wellington I arrived to witness, and whose friendship for many years I was permitted to enjoy. To resume, the party came by sea to Wei lington, then called at Port Nicholson, and thence to Otaki overland, arriving there in the month of November, 1839. Old Te Rauparaha very strongly objected to his sons going to apply for a missionary, but on their arrival at Otaki, he, being then at war with his neighbour, Te Rangitaake, quarrelled still further with that chief for the possession of the honour of having Mr Hadfield in his kaik. It was eventually decided that Mr Hadfield should divide his time between Otaki and Waikana, the headquarters of Rangitaake. Mr Williams started on December 5 to walk overland back to his home north of Auckland, and arrived at Waimate, Bay of Islands, on January 18, 1840. Soon after this Mr Hadfield baptised the two cousins, young Rauparaha taking the name of Tamihana (Thompson or Thomas) and Whiwhi that of Henere Matene (Henry Martyn), probably suggested to him by Mr Hadfield. Now comes in the question of their mission to the extreme south of what was subsequently my Diocese, and I here insert an extract from a letter received by me from Bishop Hadfield in answer to my request that he would supply me with any recollections he might have upon this subject. This letter was written from his bed in April, 1902, when 87 years of age. He says: “In the year 1842 I made an attempt, in a 12-ton decked boat, to go to Otago, but after being 10 days at sea with very foul weather, had to return to Kapiti, and it being late in the season, made no further attempt. Early in 1843 I sent two competent teachers to Akaroa and Otago. They were also accompanied by three or four good men who were slaves from those places, and who were liberated, and were allowed to return to their homes. They were well received, and Bishop Selwyn, some years afterwards, found that they had made many converts.” Bishop Hadfield then expresses regret that he had destroyed such diaries and notes as he had kept, and could not supply me with further particulars.
Early Days.
21
I am of opinion that Bishop Hadfield, writing from memory at his very advanced age, has dated this mission a little late, but at all events it was not “some years” afterwards that Bishop Selwyn visited the converts, since he was in Stewart Island on January 31, 1844.
Bishop Hadfield, residing at Otaki, soon obtained considerable influence over Te Rauparaha, and it was probably through that influence that he surrendered his prisoners from the South Island. Akaroa was the scene of one of his great slaughters, and on the occasion of my first visit there I was shown the precise spots where many were killed and others driven into the waters of the harbour. I understand that it was the determination of Tamihana and his cousin to carry the gospel of brotherhood and peace, especially to those districts in which their relatives had wrought so much destruction and misery. Bishop Hadfield does not give the names of his missionaries, but we know from Mr Wohlers’ account that it was Tamihana who, with others, reached Ruapuke and the extreme south, and I think it likely that Te Whiwhi, with such of the returned slaves as belonged to Akaroa, remained in that place and at Kaiapoi.
To continue the religious history of Otago and Southland before the establishment of European settlements in any part of these areas, I turn again to the earliest authentic records —viz., the Diary of Bishop Selwyn and to the autobiography of Mr Wohlers. From the former we learn of the Bishop’s first visit to the Middle Island (now called the South Island) and his journeyings as far as Stewart Island, Ruapuke, and all Native settlements on the mainland of the south coast. From the latter we gather an account of his arrival in Nelson as an agent of the Lutheran Missionary Society, finding there, at Cloudy Bay, a Wesleyan missionary, he determined to take advantage of the arrangements made by Mr Tuckey to visit the south in search of a suitable situation for the special settlement to be founded by the members of the Presbyterian Free Church. Mr Wohlers desired to work entirely among the Natives, and he eventually chose Ruapuke as the most suitable sphere for his labours. By a comparison of the two accounts we are able to fix the exact dates of these two missionary journeys which were so remarkably near each other. Bishop Selwyn sailed from the Bay of Islands in a wretched schooner of 20 tons called the “ Richmond,” and reached Banks Peninsula on January g, 1844. On the 10th he was at Little River. On the nth he reached Te Taumutu, where he distributed books and held the first recorded service b}' any minister in any part of what is now the Diocese of Christchurch. Passing through Timaru and Moeraki —where years afterwards the old chief Matiu (Matthew) told me he remembered his visit—the Bishop reached Waikouaiti, or perhaps Karitane, near there, and spent a night with Mr Watkins, the Wesleyan missionary. (Mr Wohlers tells us that at that time there were only two mission stations in the Middle Island; one at Cloudy Bay, Nelson, and this other at Waikouaiti.) Thence he passed across to Otakou, which, being at the entrance of the harbour, eventually gave its name to the Scottish settlement. At Otakou, Bishop Selwyn left a Native Christian, whom he had baptised at Moeraki, in
Early Days
22
the capacity of a teacher, since some of the Natives claimed to belong to the Church of England. At Otakou he met the chief Tuhawaiki, of Ruapuke, a man of great enterprise, who traded sometimes as far as Port Cooper, Lyttelton. “No English missionary,” we read, “had reached Ruapuke before this time.” Here and at Stewart Island the Bishop taught and baptised and married English whalers to Native wives. On Sunday, February 4, the Bishop held a service at Port William, Stewart Island. In after years a Native living at the Neck gave me a prayer book which Bishop Selwyn had given to him, when he was baptised, and it contained writing under Bishop Selwyn’s hand. I placed this little memorial of his visit in the Selwyn College Library.
The Bishop took passage in Tuhawaiki’s schooner, the “ Perseverance,” down to Ruapuke, and that notable chief having conceived a great admiration of the Bishop, assisted him to visit both shores of the Foveaux Straits as far, at least, as Riverton. On February 14 the Bishop had reached Akaroa on his return voyage.
Turning now to Mr Wohlers’ narritive, he writes thus; “ Towards the end of February, 1844, we were ready for the journey”—i.e., from Nelson. “Mr Tuckett had chartered for our voyage of discovery a two-masted schooner called the ‘Deborah.’ ” (Hence Deborah Bay, near Port Chalmers.) Besides Mr Wohlers and some assistants of Mr Tuckey, there were on board Dr Munro —afterwards Sir David Munro, father of the lady who became the wife of Sir James Hector —“ some jNelson gentlemen, who took the opportunity to look at the yet unknown southern part of New Zealand, and a Wesleyan missionary of the name of Creed, with his wife and child, who came from the North Island, and was to relieve missionary Watkin on the lonely east coast towards the south.” The Deborah put into Port Cooper, Lyttelton, because Mr Tuckett wished to see whether that district “was adapted for the proposed Scottish settlement.” Here they found “ the great chief Tuhawaiki. His own place of residence was on the island of Ruapuke.” t hough I have no record of the fact, I think it probable that Tuhawaiki had conveyed Bishop Selwyn as far as Port Cooper, and that he was staying there for trade purposes. Mr Wohlers had not yet determined where he would stay, and Mr Tuckett recommended his staying among the Natives on Banks Peninsula, but he declined to do so, and Tuhawaiki told him he would welcome him at Ruapuke. Mr Wohlers tells us that the chief could not read nor write, and that when he had to sign an important document “ he drew the beautiful spiral curves and lines with which his face was tattooed,” and that such signatures were received in evidence.
When Mr Tuckett had finished his examination of that neighbourhood, which occupied some time, the “Deborah,” with its passengers, sailed on to Moeraki and Waikouaiti, Tuckett landing at Moeraki and walking over to Waikouaiti.
I pause here to say perhaps how it came about that Waikouaiti was not chosen as the site of the proposed settlement. The Wairau massacre and other troubles had taught the Government that we could
Early Days.
23
not settle down with impunity on other people’s lands. It had therefore decided that before even any formal survey of Native lands might be made, there must be an arrangement with those owners of the nature of a purchase of their tribal rights. When the “Deborah ” was in Wellington Harbour, the Government had put an agent on board for the purpose of making such arrangements with Natives in the south. This agent, Mr Mantell, refused to allow Mr Tuckey to survey the Waikouaiti lands. He declared that his instructions were that not even any surveying instruments were to be landed until the land had been legally purchased from the Natives. I may add here that years afterwards I had pointed out to me by Natives what the bargains were which were made in the sale of certain blocks, both at Moeraki and at Colacs Bay. At the former place old Matiu, then 100 years of age, produced out of a box some letters from Mr Mantell describing the land marks of the boundaries, and these the old man indicated by a sweep of his arm in their direction as he lay upon his mat. He could not stand, but had been carried out of his whare, and insisted that the Government had taken more than had been sold to them. This had special reference to lands on the Waitaki, which was a cause of some trouble later on. A chief at Colacs Bay (Koraka) also explained to me that in addition to the money payment for lands sold, it was arranged that the Government was pledged to build for the Natives both churches and schools. On this plea I obtained a grant of £5O from the Government of the day for the building of the church, Hui te Rangiora, at Puketeraki, or Puketerangi—i.e., the place of the heavenly assembly on the heavenly hill.
But this is a rather long digression. The “Deborah ” cast anchor in Waikouaiti Bay, and missionary Watkin, with whom Bishop Selwyn had stayed some time before, came on board, and greeted his successor, Mr Creed, with the encouraging words. “Welcome to purgatory!” From Waikouaiti the party crossed to Otakou, and were afterwards taken in a boat to the end of the harbour, where Dunedin now stands, and we read that Mr Tuckett, “with his strong long legs,” climbed the highest hills, and was much delighted with his view of the extensive plain (the Taieri) which he overlooked. Mr Tuckett afterwards traversed that plain, directing the master of the “Deborah” to pick him up at the mouth of the Molyneux River. This was done, the vessel being under the guidance of Edward Palmer as pilot. Palmer as an old whaler having a good knowledge of the coast, accompanied the party to the Bluff; landing Mr Wohlers at Ruapuke. Palmer afterwards lived at Otakia, and I, long afterwards, spent a pleasant evening with him, and slept in his house there. Mr Wohlers says, in his autobiography, “It was the middle of May, 1844, when I landed here.”
Strictly speaking, these accounts show that representatives of what we now call “the Provincial Church of New Zealand” were the first messengers of the Gospel of Christ to the extreme south of New Zealand, but to Wohlers, who followed Selwyn within about three months of the visit of the latter, belongs the honour of being the first resident Christian minister of any denomination in those parts.
24
Early Days.
I do not learn that Mr Wohlers ever carried his mission beyond the island of Ruapuke; but it was a great pleasure to me to make the acquaintance of the good man long afterwards in Invercargill, after he had retired from active work, and to meet, on my visits to Stewart Island, his daughter, the wife of Mr A. W. Traill, of Patterson’s Inlet there. His son, Mr John Wohlers, of Thornbury, has been for many years a valued officer of the church in that place.
A Wesleyan minister, in a letter to the “ Otago Daily Times ” a few years ago, claimed for Mr Watkin, of Waikouaiti, the honour of being tne first missionary to the Natives of Ruapuke and Stewart Island. He also raised the question “ whether Mr Wohlers did not also anticipate Bishop Selwyn in the south.” What I have already written might afford a sufficient reply to this letter; but it was replied to by a Mr Carrick, formerly of Otago, then living in Wellington, who made an extract from the report of Mr Shortland, a Native Protector, contained in the Native Office, of his official visit to the southern Natives in those early days. Mr Shortland’s statement runs as follows: —“These remote parts had never before received religious instruction, except through the imperfect teachings of a Native missionary, for although there was a Wesleyan missionary at Waikouaiti, he never extended his travels beyond Otakou and Moeraki.”
The Genesis of the Diocese of Dunedin.
In the previous pages I have recorded the efforts made to Christianise the inhabitants of Otago and Southland before the establishment of any British settlements in those parts of New Zealand. I now take up the thread of my story from the point at which, settlements having been made, towns and villages formed, and a mixed population attracted to the country—largely by the discovery of gold,—it became necessary to take measures for the organisation of the Anglican communion on behalf of those who claimed to belong to it. It must be remembered that the settlement of members of the Presbyterian Church, known as the Free Church, for which Mr Tuckey had been preparing in 1844, was carried into effect in 1848, and so Dunedin was founded; and that a similar special settlement of members of the Anglican communion who, hailing from England were known as the English Church people, had been planted in Canterbury since 1850. The North Island was also so largely occupied that in 1857, organisation for the government of the Church had progressed so far, that in 1859 the first meeting of the General Synod had been held. The Diocese of Christchurch having in the meantime received its Bishop in December, 1856. At the Session of 1859 the General Synod enacted a statute for the constitution of “ Archdeaconry or Rural Deanery Boards,” and then because Dunedin was so far from Christchurch, proceeded to constitute a Rural Deanery Board for Otago and Southland under the Presidency of the Bishop of Christchurch. I am not aware that the statute referred to was ever applied to any other part of New Zealand. 1 his constitution
Early Days
30
of the Rural Deanery Board was the first step in the organisation of the Church southward of the river Waitaki. I here record the names and positions of the first members of it:—
Clergy. The Rev. J. A. Fenton, M.A., Rural Dean and Bishop’s Commissary, Curate of Waikouaiti.
The Rev. E. G. Edwards, 8.A., Curate of Dunedin,
Lay Members.
Messrs A. Chetham Strode, Wm. Carr Young, and R. B. Martin (Dunedin).
Mr J. Orbell, Waikouaiti Parochial District
Mr W. G. Filleul, Moeraki and Waitati Parochial District
Mr J. Dewe, Waihola and Tokomairiro Parochial District
Clutha, Invercargill and Riverton are declared to be Parochial Districts, but are described as being vacant.
The provisions and regulations of the first meeting of this Boarc are signed by the Bishop of Christchurch as passed February 16, iB6O
From such published reports of the annual meetings of this Rural Deanery Board as I have been able to procure, I extract the following notes as being of historic or general interest. At this first meeting then I observed that, as was natural and necessary, a Fund was established for the following purposes;—
1. Maintenance of the Clergy
2. Building of Churches, Parsonages and Schools.
3. Support of Missions.
4. General Church Purposes
It will be noticed that this “ regulation ” of the Rural Deanery is still practically in existence under the Statute of the Diocese called the General Church Fund Statute, but that the support of missions is now under a separate Board.
In the report of the Board for the year tB6i I find the following interesting remarks: “The year 1862 has commenced amidst much excitement and speculation. The wealth of the community is greatly on the increase. The Board would recall to the memories of all the members of the Church throughout the Rural Deanery the warning words of heavenly wisdom: ‘Seek ye FIRST the Kingdom of God.’ ‘lf riches increase set not your heart upon them.’ ‘Be ready to give and glad to distribute.’ ” These remarks have evidently reference to the influx of population on account of the discovery of gold, since the report also expresses the regret of the Board that it has not been able as yet to make any regular provision for the large population employed on the diggings.
In addition to the two clergymen who were members of the Board, allusion is also made to the arrival of a clergyman for the Moeraki and Waitangi districts (sic), and one for Invercargill. For the latter place
31
Early Days.
it is also said that the people had built a church, and “ are now busy collecting funds to provide a parsonage.” This could not have been a very successful effort, as there was no parsonage for Mr Tanner, the clergyman alluded to, until long after my arrival. There is also a mysterious mention of the expected arrival of a clergyman for Popotunoa, at which place it is said that “ a small parsonage had been purchased by the inhabitants of the surrounding district, and a clergyman is now on his way to take charge of that cure.” On my first journey to Invercargill in June, 1871, I spent the night at the small hotel at the mouth of the Popotunoa Gorge, as that was where the coach stopped on the second night from Dunedin; but there were no other houses nearer than the Kuriwaio sheep station, and the residence of Mr Steele on the bank of that stream. When the railway passed through the district at a later date, the township of Clinton gathered around the railway station, and I established a church there; but I never heard either of the “parsonage” or of the clergyman spoken of.
The report for the year 1862 was manifestly drawn up a date considerably later than the meeting of the Board itself, which is simplysaid to have been “in January last.” (The printed date should probably be 1863.) In the absence of the Bishop of Christchurch, the Rev. J. A. Fenton presided, although in the report itself it is recorded that Mr Fenton had resigned his Cure of Waikouaiti, and was about to proceed to England. It is noteable that in this Session a resolution was passed “endorsing the views expressed by the Primate” (Bishop Selwyn) , “ the Bishop of Christchurch, and the Dioceson Synod of Christchurch, that the time has arrived when it is desirable that there should be a Bishop of Dunedin.” The Rural Dean was also requested to draw up an address to the Bishop of Christchurch asking him “ at your next approaching visitation to urge upon the members of the Church the exercise of an abundant liberality in contributing to the endowment of the proposed Bishopric.” In another clause of this address to the Bishop it is said “ That although the Board cannot expect to raise at once an Endowment Fund sufficiently large to provide an adequate stipend for a Bishop, yet, looking at the case of several of her New Zealand and Colonial Sees, the Board is encouraged to hope that, notwithstanding, a clergyman who would possess the very highest qualifications for the office can be found to accept the Bishopric.” If this clause of the address had reference to a particular clergyman then in view, I have reasons for saying that it could not have been Bishop Jenner. It is somewhat strange to find in the same report of the Session of 1862 a statement that the resolution and address were laid before the Bishop of Christchurch on the occasion of his visitation, and that on his return to Dunedin at the close of it, he advised that nothing more should be done “ until he could ascertain the Primate’s opinion as to the amount which it would be necessary to provide in the first instance.” There is also an addendum to the report which tells us that the Bishop of Christchurch had received a letter from the Primate, in which he “intimates that a sum of not less than £5,000 must be raised before the Royal Authority can be obtained for the
Early Days.
32
proposed Bishopric of Otago and Southland.” It is also stated that the Primate had promised £lOO towards this sum. The Rev. E. G. Edwards was appointed Rural Dean to succeed Mr Fenton, and a note is added that the Rev. Mr Dasent was expected to arrive in the “Epsom,” and would be appointed to Waikouaiti.
The reports for the years 1863 and 1864 contain no matter of general interest, and the one said to be for 1865 is only an “abstract of receipts and expenditure,” and curiously enough is on the title page said to have been “Printed at the ‘Daily Times Office,’ 1867.”
The report for the year 1866 is, however, of more historic interest. The Bishop of Christchurch presided, and in an address to the members, he sets before them what had recently occurred in the matter of the Bishopric. He reminds them that in 1863 he had been requested to promote the establishment of a Bishopric, especially by appealing to all for an Endowment Fund. He states that the results of his personal efforts was the offer of subscriptions to the amount of £950, and that after hearing of the action of the Archbishop of Canterbury, “ the Bishop of New Zealand (Bishop Selwyn) had visited the Rural Deanery, and by his exertions had added considerably to the contributions for the endowment.” In another part of the address he states the total promises to be £1,836 7s lod; but he also says that efforts to obtain subscriptions were attended with but little success. The Bishop speaks of the increase of the population as an argument for the constitution of the separate Diocese—stating that at his first visit in 1857 the church population could not have exceeded 700 in all, of whom about 250 were in Dunedin and the neighbourhood, whereas it must now consist of many thousands.
The members of the Board responded to the Bishop’s appeal by passing the following resolution: —“ The Rev. H. L. Jenner having been nominated by the Archbishop of Canterbury, and consecrated under Roj'al mandate Bishop of the See of Dunedin, this Board recognises the duty of making preparation for his reception by providing a suitable residence and completing the requisite endowment.” It is important to remark that the Board was mistaken in supposing that tne Royal mandate assigned the See of Dunedin to the jurisdiction of Bishop Jenner. The designation given in the mandate is merely “TO be a Bishop in our Colony of New Zealand.”
Early in iB6g Bishop Jenner visited New Zealand; that is, a few months after the General Synod of 1868 had constituted the new Diocese, and had also, at the same time, requested Bishop Jenner to withdraw his claim to be appointed to it, on account of the unwillingness of the Diocese to receive him. While in Dunedin Bishop Jenner addressed a letter to the Bishop of Christchurch, in which he declined to comply with the request of the General Synod. This letter is dated Dunedin, April 5, 1869, and signed by him as “A Bishop of the United Church of England and Ireland, in the Colony of New Zealand.” This letter had necessarily to be made the subject of action by the General Synod of 1871, and was of no little constitutional importance.
33
Early Days.
I need make no further reference to meetings of the Rural Deanery Board than to say that subsequent meetings to that of 1866 make no allusion to any efforts of the carrying out of the resolution carried in that Session to provide a residence for a Bishop, or the increase of the Endowment Fund. I notice, however, that in the report of 1867 it is stated that over £5OO of the subscriptions promised remain unpaid. The year 1869 is notable as that in which the first Synod of the Diocese of Dunedin was held, and this took place on April 7; that is, exactly six months after the constitution of the Diocese by the General Synod of 1868. In his opening address the Bishop of Christchurch reminded the members that, though he was still in charge of the Diocese by the provision of the General Synod of 1868, he held it, as it were, “in commendam,” and that it was expected that he should resign it when a Bishop had been lawfully appointed. He was also careful to point out that “by our Church constitution, the nomination of a Bishop must proceed from the Diocesan Synod,” and also that such nomination must be confirmed by the General Synod or by the majority of the Standing Committee of the several Dioceses, should the General Synod be not in Session.
Many motions were brought before the Synod relative to the acceptance of Bishop Jenner, and long discussions ensued, but nothing yas carried. One such motion, moved by the Rev. E. G. Edwards, was “ That the case of Bishop Jenner be referred to the Archbishop of Canterbury for his final decision; such case to be drawn up by the Primate ” (Bishop Harper), but this also was rejected. It should be noted that the Primate, as Bishop of Christchurch, declined to vote on any of these motions, regarding the question as that of the nomination of a Bishop to a Diocese, which matter appertains alone to the clerg> and laity representing it.
In the Session of the Diocesan Synod for the year 1870 no reference was made, either in the address of the President or in the proceedings of the Synod itself, to the Bishopric question. It was doubtless thought best to leave the matter to be dealt with by the General Synod at its ensuing meeting in 1871; inasmuch as Bishop Jenner’s refusal to comply with the request made by the General Synod of 1868, coupled with his demand for recognition, were in contravention of the action and legislation of the General Synod itself.
Before I proceed to give any account of the decision of the General Synod relative to this matter in its Session of 1871, it appears to be desirable that I should supply a little more fully, such details as have come to my knowledge, of how this trouble came about. In my account of the meetings of the Rural Deanery Board, I have pointed out that as early as the year 1863 the establishment of a Bishopric for Dunedin was contemplated, and that in 1866 something had happened which caused both the Primate (Bishop Selwyn) and the Bishop of Christchurch to take up the matter more urgently. I believe the following to be a true account of the history of the Jenner episode. Bishop Selwyn, as Primate, had doubtless been made acquainted with the wishes of the southern church people as expressed by the Rural
Early Days.
34
Deanery Board of 1863, and that those wishes were in full accord with the desires of the Bishop of Christchurch, who had been endeavouring to raise an endowment for the proposed See. Some time in 1865 the Primate proposed to bring this project to a completion, and, with his customary “ solvitur ambulando ” mode of proceeding, determined to visit the south, and to bring his great influence to bear on the matter. Unfortunately, as things turned out, before leaving Auckland he wrote a letter to Archbishop Longley in which he informed him of this purpose, and he appears to have suggested his looking out for a suitable man for appointment to the Bishopric, which he expected to be enabled to establish. Bishop Selwyn might feel justified in this, not only in view of the formally expressed wishes of the Rural Deanery Board, but because the course he was pursuing was not unlike that by which other Bishoprics had been established in earlier days. When afterwards he found, that in the opinion of the church authorities in the south, the appointment of a Bishop was premature, and that they were adverse to such an appointment, Bishop Selwyn wrote to the Archbishop again, warning him to take no notice of his former letter, but this second letter was too late, as the first one had been too soon. The consecration of the Rev. H. L. Jenner had already taken place. The too precipitate action of the Archbishop appears to been brought about by the following circumstances; The Diocese of Nelson, rendered vacant by the resignation of Bishop Hobhouse, had used the power of delegation given by the General Synod Statutes, and requested the Bishop of London to select a clergyman to fill the vacancy. The Rev. A. B. Suter had been so selected and a date fixed for his consecration. About this time the Rev. H. L. Jenner sought the advice of the Archbishop, his Diocesan, with reference to certain difficulties in which he was involved. The Archbishop knew Mr Jenner to be a scholar and a gentleman of good family, and a man of literary ability. With the letter of Bishop Selwyn in his mind he asked Mr Jenner if he would like to go to New Zealand and become Bishop of Dunedin, telling him at the same time that he had shortly to consecrate a Bishop for service in that country. It was eventually arranged, without further communication with New Zealand, that Mr Jenner should be admitted to consecration, together with Mr Suter, on St. u° ° meW S August 2 4. 1866. It was the arrival of this news which caused Bishop Selwyn at once to visit Otago again, and to endeavour, together with the Bishop of Christchurch, to make the best of what had happened. They sought, therefore, to secure the acceptance of the Bishop and to raise an adequate endowment, with, however, but small success.
It is not unimportant that I should mention that the delegated nomination of a Bishop for the Diocese of Nelson by the Bishop of London had been transmitted to New Zealand and confirmed by the General Synod in accordance with the constitution at the Session in April, 1865. The importance of confirmation by the General Synod, even of a delegated nomination, is emphasised by this interval of more than a year and a-half between the selection and consecration of
30
Early Days.
Bishop Suter, and yet in Bishop Jenner’s case Archbishop Longley, even supposing he had received authority to nominate, failed to refer the question of confirmation to New Zealand at all.
The position then of the Diocese of Dunedin when the General Synod met in February, 1871, was precisely that in which it had been placed at the date of its constitution by the General Synod of 1868; the last one over which Bishop Selwyn presided, and Bishop Harper, now Primate, still held it in his charge. [The Statute of the General Synod of 1868, made nearly two years after the consecration of Bishop Jenner, by which all the country south of the River Waitaki was separated from the Diocese of Christchurch and constituted the Diocese of Dunedin contained a clause which declared that the new Diocese should “ continue to be under the charge of the Bishop of Christchurch until his successor should be lawfully appointed.”] As Primate, of course, Bishop Harper presided at this Session of the General Synod, and as he graciously invited me to occupy a seat therein, I had the opportunity of sitting amongst the Fathers of the New Zealand Church and of listening to the important debates of the Session. Before I proceed to make an)' comments on these, I think it better to complete the story of the Jenner controversy by recounting the final action of the General Synod upon it. The Primate laid upon the table two documents of considerable importance with regard to this matter. The first was a copy of a “judgment” given by Archbishop Tait —then Archbishop of Canterbury—upon the claim of Bishop Jenner to be regarded as Bishop of Dunedin, in which the Archbishop, with the evidence before him, concluded in favour of that claim. And the other was a letter from Bishop Jenner himself in which he “ protests against the invasion of his Diocesan rights ” by the Bishop of Christchurch, and declares that he treats the action of the General Synod of 1868 “as null and void.” This letter also records that a number of the English Bishops had “ signified their concurrence with the judgment of the Archbishop of Canterbury,” and also states that he had issued “ a Pastoral letter to the clergy and laity of the Diocese of Dunedin in which he declares that he is their Bishop, and demands all the rights and privileges belonging to that position.”
These documents being thus brought under the cognizance of the General Synod, it became necessary that some pronouncement should be made by that body upon the claims put forward. In answer to a question by one of the members, whether, if no formal request had been addressed to the Synod to take action upon these documents, any motion proposing to deal with the matter was admissible? The Primate replied that since Bishop Jenner’s letter amounted to a refusal to comply with a request made to him by a former Session of the Synod, and that the meeting in 1871 was a meeting of the same governing body of the Church, it was proper that the Synod should give a further expression of its opinion upon the matter.
On February 8 a motion was brought before the Synod by Mr E. C. Quick, and seconded by Mr R. B. Martin, both of the Diocese of Dunedin, which, after reciting the fact that the Synod of 1868 “took
Early Days.
36
into consideration all the circumstances of the nomination and consecration of Bishop Jenner, and did thereupon formally request that he should withdraw his claim to the position of Bishop of Dunedin, to which request Bishop Jenner had declined to accede—and whereas the iaw of the Church requires the sanction of the General Synod to the nomination of a Bishop to any See in New Zealand.—Resolved, That this Synod does hereby refuse to sanction the nomination of Bishop Jenner to the See of Dunedin, whether that nomination was in due form or otherwise.” The motion proceeded to express sympathy with the Bishop in the painful position in which he had been placed, and it was carried nemine contradicente.
This letter, quoted in the “ Times,” shows how anxious Selwyn was to dismiss the Jenner question, though his wisdom is scarcely so obvious:-
The Palace, Lichfield, February 17, 1872
My Df.ar Bishop, —There are really two sides to the Dunedin question, though you have only heard one. You cannot suppose that T should quarrel with my last Synod, or differ from my best friends, without strong reason. I have done my best to make everything smooth for the future, and my advice to you is, and ever will be, to let bygones be bygones. It is as natural and, in my judgment, as right for the Archbishop of Canterbury to look upon you as the second Bishop of Dunedin as it is for you to consider yourself as the first. If I had not gone upon this plan of smoothing difficulties, I should have impugned the consecration of Bishop Suter, who refused to sign the declaration required by the New Zealand Synod when Bishop Jenner signed it. They were both consecrated together. How strange then it would be that the man who disobeyed the law of the Synod should be accepted as the accuser and condemner of the man who obeyed it. My counsel is to say nothing more about the matter either here or in New Zealand.
I remain, your faithful friend and brother. G. A. Lichfield.
I may now proceed to give a short review of the character and doings of this Session of the General Synod, and I may call attention to the very early period of our ecclesiastical history at which I was brought into connection with it by noting that, although this meeting was the fifth of the triennial Sessions, yet the period included was only 12 years from the date of the first General Synod which took place in 1859, and as the Constitution adopted at that date was revised in 1865, the finally accepted Constitution of the governing body of the Church was in February, 1871, but little more than five years old. The necessity for the revision also was largely because the second Session of 1862 was an irregular one, the clerical and lay members of the Diocese of Christchurch having refused to attend, as an evidence of their dissatisfaction with what had been laid down. The privilege accorded to me of a seat in this Synod gave me the highly valued opportunity of association with many of those Fathers of our Church in this country who had been strenuously engaged in directing the earliest steps of her organisation. The character of the Synod of 1871 was therefore that of a newly born member of the Catholic family, timidly recognising its inherent vitality and individual responsibility, but yet somewhat alarmed at the discovery of its having been launched into
Early Days.
37
new conditions. This position was the more natural since the Synod of 1868 had been almost entirely occupied by two matters of an allabsorbing character —viz., the Dunedin Bishopric question and the resignation of Bishop Selwyn, and the important property questions involved therein.
The Primate (the Bishop of Christchurch) in his opening address to the Synod very clearly indicated his view of the growing freedom of the Church in the colony, and while allowing that the Fundamental Provisions (so called) of the constitution of our governing body forbade our making any alterations in the prayer book and articles, he pointed out that in the consecration of Bishop Hadfield there had for the first time been no mandate from the Crown authorising such consecration, and that he had himself made such deviation from the ordinal, as the circumstances of that case required, he recommended the sanction by the Synod of additional forms of services for special occasions and made the following pregnant declaration in support of such services—viz., that these “would not be inconsistent with the Act of Uniformity Amendment Act of 1865 BY WHICH OUR BRETHREN IN ENGLAND ARE AT PRESENT BOUND.”
In the subsequent proceedings of the Synod several questions and motions were brought forward on this subject. In answer to a question bv the Bishop of Nelson, Sir William Martin declared his opinion that the clergy were free to use in their public ministry forms of prayer not contained in the prayer book, PROVIDED SUCH FORMS WERE SANCTIONED BY THIS SYNOD. The Bishop of Nelson (Dr Suter) also moved for the appointment of a committee “ to draw up a memorial to the authorities of the Church at Home, asking that such measures might be taken as may afford relief to the clergy in difficulties arising from the combination of services.” This caused no little discussion, but an amendment which was carried declared that “ This Synod recognises the expediency of a certain discretion being exercised the Bishops in sanctioning divisions in the services and modifications in the manner of celebrating those services.” Subsequently the Bishops were asked to inform the Synod what divisions and modifications they were willing to sanction. Their answer may be found in an appendix which was added to the “Report ” of the Synod. It is curious also to notice that a special Standing Order was framed by the Synod which prescribed the mode by which such forms of prayer should be brought before the Synod, with provisions to ensure their careful consideration before adoption. This Standing Order disappeared after the Synod of 1874, probably because the legislation of that Synod was regarded as rendering it no longer necessary.
Two other motions which claimed the attention of the Synod I would mention, as they each indicate the mind of many church people of that day on the subjects to which they refer. The first of these, proposed by Archdeacon Harper and seconded by Dr Buchanan, ot Dunedin, was “ That a Committee be appointed to consider the Fundamental Provisions of the Constitution of the Branch of the United Church of England and Ireland in New Zealand, and to report whether
33
Early Days
it appears that the time has come for the General Synod to assume full power as contemplated in Clause 4 ‘to make such alterations in the Articles, Services and Ceremonies of the Church in New Zealand as its altered circumstances may be required.’ ” This motion was lost by the votes of both clergy and laity, but it is noteworthy that a majority of the Bishops voted in favour of it. The occasion which called for this inquiry was the disestablishment of the Church of Ireland by reason of which there was no longer any United Church of England and Ireland. As a similar motion was brought forward in the General Synod of 1874 I shall defer any remarks I might make upon the force of the “Fundamental Provisions” until I come to consider the legislation of that meeting, which involved so much discussion of Church principles. I notice the matter at this time because it shows at how early a date it occupied the mind of so many of the bestinformed members of the Synod, including, as the names suggested to form the committee showed, several who had been engaged in the framing of the Constitution itself.
The other motion to which I have called attention was on the subject of Religious Education in the State schools, and was specially called for at the time because the Government was then engaged upon the consideration of a Bill for the establishment of a scheme for public elementary education. It was decided to present a petition to the Government urging that aid should be given to all denominational schools which satisfied the Government requirements, and that State schools should be opened with the reading of Holy Scripture and with prayer. It was suggested in the course of the debate on this subject that the Government should provide for at least as much opportunity for the religious instruction of the young of this country as had been prescribed in the Education Act passed by the Imperial Government only a few months before. It will be seen, therefore, that from the time at which the general Government of New Zealand first addressed itself to the constitution of a scheme for the education of the children of the land, the Church intervened on behalf of a higher conception of what education really means. At this point I may say for my own part that, in common with other Bishops and clergy, I laboured for many years after this time in Synods and sermons and lectures to convince the people that to confine the subject matter of education to such teaching as would prove of advantage in mercantile and materialistic concerns was to ignore the highest attributes and destinies of man and to vitiate even human society by the atrophy of his noblest powers.
The Second Synod of the Diocese of Dunedin.
The General Synod of 1871 closed its Session on February 18, and the Primate, in his capacity of Bishop in charge of the Diocese of Dunedin, summoned a meeting of the Diocesan Synod to be opened on the Ist day of March following. The General Synod having cleared the ground by refusing to confirm the nomination of Bishop Jenner,
Early Days
39
and the Bishop of Christchurch being desirous of relief from the charge of the Diocese, the way was open for the Diocesan Synod to proceed in a constitutional manner to the nomination of a Bishop to preside over it.
By this time the history of my coming to New Zealand had been freely communicated to the church people of Dunedin by the northern members of the General Synod, who were themselves familair with it, as well as in other ways, and I was soon approached by clergy and lay people to ascertain whether I was willing to accept the charge of the Diocese should I lawfully be asked to do so. I was assured that by so doing I should heal the breaches of party which had sprung up. I was also assured that peace being thus restored there would be little difficulty in raising an endowment fund, and providing for other necessities of the Diocese. I replied that if the call came to me with unanimity I should probably regard it as the call of God; but that I was very sympathetic with Bishop Jenner in the position in which he was placed, and that I should wish to consult leading officers of the Church on the position before giving a decided answer.
At this juncture Mrs Nevill and I determined to go away from Dunedin, and thus to escape from all discussion of this matter. We took passage by Cobb’s coach to Queenstown, and were hospitably received at the end of the first day’s journey by the Rev. G. P. Beaumont, who had then but recently been appointed to the charge of Lawrence, at that time called the parish of Tuapeka and Waitahuna. The character of the journey may be gathered from the fact that we were standing in the street in front of the coach office in Lawrence at 3.30 in the morning, as it would take the whole of a very long day to reach Roxburgh before nightfall, as the travelling had to be so slow. Mrs Nevill’s anxieties were the greater, as sitting next to the driver on the seat she found him towards the afternoon continually falling into snatches of sleep, being overcome partly by the heat, but not a little by effects of his being “ shouted for ” by the miners who were our fellow-travellers at so many of the wayside stopping places. The good man tried to reassure Mrs Nevill by saying that he had never quite fallen off the coach. The last stage of the journey—viz., from Clyde to Queenstown —impressed us not a little as we passed through the gorges of the Molyneux and the Kaiwarau, with the stupendous mountains on either side, and the roaring rivers, leaving at that time but a narrow roadway on the banks above. The coach, which did not go further than Clyde, was at that point replaced by an open cart, and the blinding sand often so obscured the way, sometimes even hiding the horses themselves, as to endanger a plunge over the cliff. Our driver informed us that his predecessor had gone over, and that man and horses and trap had been broken to pieces in the rock-strewn torrent below. Ere long, by the blasting of rock masses and slight deviations and the construction of a bridge which enabled the most dangerous part to be avoided, this road was so greatly improved as to become a regular traffic road, and to be used without accident by a succession of clergy placed in charge of the district. We stayed a
Early Days.
35
few weeks in Queenstown, and I gave a holiday to the resident clergyman, taking his services for the time being. While there and on March 3 I received a telegram from the President of the Diocesan Synod then in session informing me that I had been nominated to the Bishopric by a unanimous vote of the clergy, and with only one dissentient vote of the laity, the election having been conducted by the ballot, I was subsequently asked by the Primate whether I should wish to be consecrated in New Zealand or whether I should desire him to request the Archbishop of Canterbury to perform this function as he had done for my friend, Bishop Cowie, of Auckland, a short time before. I replied that I thought it much more canonical that a Bishop should be consecrated in the province and in the presence of the people of the Diocese in which he was to serve; but before this question was addressed to me I had written to Sir William Martin as a great friend of Bishop Selwyn, and well acquainted with ecclesiastical law, asking him whether, in the face of Bishop Jenner’s persistent claim, and the so-called judgment of the Archbishop thereupon, with which many English Bishops had expressed concurrence, there could be brought against me any reasonable charge of schismatical action in accepting the Bishopric of Dunedin, or whether, in the event of my declining to accept the nomination, there was any prospect of the irregularity of Bishop Jenner’s consecration being put right by the action of the Diocesan and General Synods? To this he had replied that I need not hesitate to accept, as Bishop Jenner had never been appointed Bishop of Dunedin, and if I did not accept he was now probably the last man who would be asked to do so. He concluded by expressing a hope that I would not decline.
It was subsequently arranged that my consecration should take place in St. Paul’s Church, Dunedin, upon the 4th day of June next ensuing, and that I should leave for England as soon thereafter as convenient, both for the purpose of winding up my affairs at Home and to do what I could to raise funds for the Diocese from various churches, societies and in other ways.
My brother, the Rev. Edmund Berrey Nevill, had been recommended by his medical man to reside for a while in Australia on account of his health. He was residing at Drayton, in Queensland, and I sent for him to act as my Chaplain at the consecration. This he did, and the Bishop of Wellington subsequently asked him to take charge of the parish of Wanganui.
On the date fixed for the consecration the Primate was assisted by the Bishops of Wellington, Nelson and Waiapu (Bishop William Williams, one of the original missionaries to heathen New Zealand). The Bishop of Wellington (Bishop Hadfield) preached the sermon on the occasion; he also, as I have already related, was one of the early missionaries. Looking back, as I now do at the close of half a century, to these apostles of the Church of New Zealand from whom I received my mission, it is not surprising that I count myself as one of the Apostolic Fathers.
41
Early Days.
Statistics of Diocese, 1871.
Clergy (10). —Rev. E. J. Edwards (Curate of St. Paul’s, Dunedin); Rev. E. H. Granger, M.A. (All Saints); Rev. A. Gifford (St. Luke’s, Oamaru); Rev. A. Dasent (St. John’s, Waikouaiti); Rev. R. L. Stanford, M.A. (St. John’s, Tokomariro); Rev. W. P. Tanner, M.A. (St. John’s, Invercargill); Rev. W. F. Oldham, M.A. (St. Mary’s, Riverton); Rev. R. Coffey, M.A. (St. Peter’s, Queenstown); Rev. G. P. Beaumont, M.A. (Holy Trinity, Tuapeka); Rev. T. L. Stanley (Port Chalmers).
Lay Readers.—A. F. Oswin (Caversham), N. Downes (Port Chalmers), J. Dewe (Tokomariro), Thos. Johnstone (Weatherstone), Filleul (Oamaru), Martin (Winton).
Churches.—Dunedin 2, Caversham 1, Oamaru 1, Waikouaiti 1, Goodwood 1, Tokomariro 1, Inchclutha 1, Lawrence I, Invercargill 1, Riverton 1, Queenstown 1, Ryall Bush I, Clyde I (not proper church, but iron building).
In the evening of the day of my consecration the Bishop of Christchurch declared publicly from the sanctuary of St. Paul’s Church that his tenure of the Diocese of Dunedin had ceased on that day in accordance with the terms of Clause 2 of Statute No, 12 of the General Synod of 1868, which constituted the Diocese of Dunedin, and he thereupon, acting as Primate, placed me in a chair within the altar rails and pronounced that I had been duly elected, confirmed, and consecrated to be the Bishop of the See.
While the Primate was still in Dunedin a meeting of the Standing Committee was summoned for the purpose of considering what steps should be taken to promote the Endowment Fund of the Bishopric and to provide a See House for the Diocese. I requested the Primate to preside, and the Rev. E. H. Granger acted as secretary. At that time the ruling rate of interest for money was 10 per centum, and the cost of building very high. The Primate, however, urged the undertaking of both the above-mentioned objects, and said that as he would now be able to concentrate his labour on the Diocese of Christchurch, he had no doubt that some help would be obtained from the Jackson Trust Estate of his Diocese towards the endowment of the Diocese of Dunedin. Eventually, with a view to relieve somewhat the immediate pressure upon the committee, I made the following offer—viz.: That if they would fix the sum which the Diocese should expend upon the erection of a residence for the Bishop, I would build the house, spending what I thought well upon it, on the conditions that it should be purchased from me at the price they fixed within 10 years from that date; and that in the meantime interest should be paid to me upon the fixed sum, or such part as remained unpaid, at the rate of 5 per cent. These terms were accepted, and it was decided, after consideration, that the Diocese should be pledged to find the sum of £2,500 as the price of the See House. Two committees were then set up to raise funds on behalf of these objects, and I was thanked for having come to the rescue in a matter of great difficulty. I may add on this matter that I shortly afterwards purchased 25 acres at Roslyn from A. C. Strode,
Early Days
37
Esq., and accepted a design by Messrs Mason and Wales, architects, for the See House, which cost me much more than double the amount stipulated for by the Standing Committee. I built so large a house because I had formed the plan of receiving students for the holy ministry to reside with me; a design which was carried out.
At that time an American firm had made a contract for a line of steamers to ply between San Francisco and New Zealand, and I arranged to take passage in the s.s. “Nevada” to sail for San Francisco on July 4. I extract from my diary the following entries recording the ecclesiastical acts performed in the month’s interval;—
“ June 7. —Laid the foundation stone of a church for Port Chalmers, this being my first official act. The clergy present were the Revs. Edwards, Granger and Stanley. Well received. The ships in harbour mounted bunting, and salutes were fired. Masonic procession; also of the Sunday school children. Preached in Masonic Hall in the evening.”
“June 11. —Held confirmation in St. John’s, Invercargill (first confirmation). On the day before (Saturday) started from Popotunoa in a sort of express cart at 4 o’clock in the morning; quite dark; two horses; driver a Dane; I being the only passenger. Harness so rotten that the trace broke while crossing first stream soon after starting. At several places on the plains had to cut flax to fill up swampy places. Arrived at 8 o’clock in the evening. Very cold. Confirmed four males and six females.”
“ June 28.—Held service in schoolroom, Mornington, and publicly licensed Mr Bampton as Lay Reader for the district. Organist and some members of St. Paul’s Choir assisted.”
“June 30. —Consecrated the newly-built church of Holy Trinity, Lawrence. Clergy present: The Rev. G. P. Beaumont, curate in charge! and the Rev. R. L. Stanford. Mr Gooday, a barrister, read the petition to consecrate. Attendance good. Choir fair. Jackson’s Te Deum.’ Celebrated Holy Communion and preached from 1 Kings ix, 3.”
“ July 2. —Sunday, preached at morning service Holy Trinity, Lawrence, and held confirmation in the evening. Fourteen candidates—five males and nine females—two being from Waipori, 20 miles off, the hills crossed being covered with snow. Church crowded to excess. Some Chinese present.”
“July 3.—After reaching Dunedin a farewell service was held in St. Paul’s, at which an address was presented, signed by every clergyman, Church warden and lay representative in the Diocese.”
Other arrangements made before leaving were with the Rev. Joshua Jones, of the Diocese of Queensland (who had been prepared for Holy Orders by my brother and ordained by Bishop Tufnell), to take charge of Clyde. I had arranged with the church people of the district to pay a stipend of £3OO per annum. Mr John Dewe, of Tokomairiro, a Cambridge undergraduate, who had been unable to continue his studies in the university through the death of his father, was to
43
Early Days.
be paid lay reader at Roxburgh at a stipend of £125 and a residence, the old station at Moa Flat, kindly lent by the manager of the estate. Mr Dewe had acted as lay reader for Milton, and was a member of the Diocesan Synod.
I pause at this point to say a word as to our private feelings in the prospect of giving up our English home and friends with a view to a permanent residence in Otago. We had both been very happy in our work at Shelton, and I was well aware that my dear wife was so deeply attached to her father as to shrink much from an apparently life-long separation from him. She had never known her mother, and perhaps clung more closely to her remaining parent on that account. We had, it was true, largely faced this position when we left Home with a probability of being called upon to reside in Wellington, but now that a decision had to be made, and that to undertake a work so little prepared for, and that under circumstances of so great difficulty and amongst a population for the most part strenuously engaged in the effort to preserve Presbyterianism as the dominant religious power in the community, the position was not quite the same; yet, on the other hand, the whole history seemed to be so clear, by the leading of Providence, as to leave no other course open to us than to accept that guidance and to trust in God. This was our feeling as we turned our face homewards to wind up our affairs.
A word also as to the early date in the history of the Otago settlement at which my connection therewith began as well as in relation to the primitive history of the Catholic Church in New Zealand generally.
The founding of the special settlement of the Presbyterians under Captain Cargill dates from 1849. Some 12 years afterwards the discovery of gold led to a large influx of men of English and Irish origin, chiefly from Australia. The Scottish settlers in Dunedin were wont to call these “the New Iniquity,” while they dubbed themselves “the Old Identities.” The terms on which the Presbyterians were to obtain their lands from the Government were never entirely fulfilled by them, and the settlement had to be declared an open one, though their right to hold the lands they were in possession of at that time has never been challenged. At the date of my arrival in Dunedin, then the settlement itself was little over 20 years old, and when made Bishop I was a “New Iniquity” indeed. A very amusing account was given in a local print of a meeting of Presbyterian ministers and others, said to have been held to discuss the manner in which I should be received and by what title recognised. It was said that having sat far into the night discussing so important a question, one of the ministers discovered that they were all Bishops, and therefore they might call me Bishop Nevill and each other Bishop Stuart or Bishop Bannerman as the case might be, and that after this satisfactory conclusion they all jumped up and sang “For we are jolly good fellows,” etc.; I suppose including me among the number.
Early Days
44
That the date of my election as first Bishop of Dunedin was at a very early stage of the history of the Catholic Church in New Zealand will strikingly appear when I point out that the arrival of the first Bishop of Christchurch had occurred at Christmas, 1856, the 3rd of March, 1871, was therefore but little more than 14 years after the first practical constitution of the Church in the South Island. The Bishopric of Nelson dates from the arrival of Bishop Hobhouse to take charge of it early in 1859, about 12 years before my acceptance of the Diocese of Dunedin. The first religious service of any kind by a clergyman of the Church was that conducted by Bishop Selwyn on his first progress in the South Island in 1844; but it was long before he was able to establish clergymen to minister in any part of it.
The Return to England in 1871 and Work Accomplished there.
On July 4 then, in accordance with the arrangements above recorded, we went on board the “Nevada” to return to England by the same route by which we had come. We received every attention from the American captain, his officers and crew. With his entire approval I held services on the Sundays, and the voyage was pleasant enough, with but little to mark it distinctively. Our cabins were on deck, and there was so much top hamper as to give great surface for a strong wind to play against. Remarking on this subject one day to the captain, I asked what he would do in the event of anything like a hurricane occurring at any time. “Wall,” said he, “if there was anything like a hurricane I guess they’d all be overboard in about half an hour!” He signified that a large store of hatchetts were kept at hand for use in case of need. This happy-go-lucky style was further illustrated by the captain asking me into his cabin one evening to look at his charts. He said: “You see there’s a small island marked here, and I’m taking a course straight for it because I know that wherever it is it isn’t there.” I asked about what time do you expect to get at the spot marked for the island, and he replied: “Oh, about midnight.” I did not stay up, however, as I had come to the conclusion that he derived some amusement from the endeavour to “ pull my leg.” On arrival at Honolulu it was found that we should have to stay some days for cargo, and we were again invited to be the guests of our good friend Mr May.
At San Francisco, our names getting into the papers, we were called on by Bishop Kip, and on the Sunday following attended divine service in his cathedral church. We were not favourably impressed by the conduct of the congregation, nor even by the character of the service itself, which was n o’clock matins. The heat was doubtless responsible for the ceaseless waving of fans on the part of the ladies, while the men present chose their own attitudes and maintained them almost throughout. Nor did we admire the highly-paid choir, consisting of four voices, placed in a high gallery which projected from
Early Days.
45
a side wall and was curtained round. When singing these curtains were drawn aside, and the choir stood up, but as soon as the canticle or hymn was over they were closed again, and the choir disappeared. I believe that this undevout state of things has since given way to better things as in America generally. We did not stay long in San Francisco, as we had seen it pretty thoroughly before, and we decided to proceed as far as Detroit on the American line, and thence to go into Canada. Our party now consisted of Miss May, who had been placed in our charge by her father with a view to her visiting England, a Mrs and Miss Bostock, who were our fellow-passengers from Honolulu, and a Mr Sewell, a nephew of the Hon. Mr Sewell, a Minister of the Crown in New Zealand, whose acquaintance we had made in Wellington.
The only noticeable incidents upon the journey to Detroit were that, as all were through passengers and had to pass several nights on board the train, I tried to arrange that one end of the long carriage, with its provisions for ablutions, should be assigned to the ladies, and the other, which was similarly provided, should be for gentlemen only. This was in the main gladly accepted by both sexes, but there was one lady of a decided character who stoutly refused to fall in with the suggestion, and as her bunk was nearer the gentlemen’s end, it was there that she boldly appeared from time to time. I may also mention that as one of our days was a Sunday I asked the passengers whether they would like to have a short service conducted on board the train. No one objected, and some were glad to join, so I prepared a shortened form from the prayer book, sung “ All people that on earth do dwell,” and, standing at one end of the car, gave a short address on Christian brotherhood.
Arriving at Chicago, we took rooms in the nine-storey hotel called “ Freemont House,” which, but a few weeks afterwards, was burned to the ground. One evening we dined with Bishop Whitehouse, known to churchmen of the last generation as the large-hearted Bishop of Illinois. We much enjoyed his society and the warm welcome of his wife. We subsequently attended a service at his Cathedral, and were shown over the same. It was designed upon the model of the Greek Church, with a circular apse and the Bishop’s Throne, with sedilia for priests on either side, behind the altar.
From Chicago we proceeded, via the Grand Trunk Railway, to Toronto, and there I preached in Bishop Bethune’s Cathedral, and afterwards dined with him. We were politely shown over the city by the Bishop’s son on the following day, visiting the University and the Divinity School. I was invited by the Bishop of Montreal, the Metropolitan, to take part in the consecration of a Bishop Co-adjutor for the Diocese of Huron, Western Canada, and desiring to do so, accompanied him, together with the Bishops of Toronto and Ontario (Bishop Lewis, afterwards Metropolitan) to the city of London (C.W.). We were all received by Dr Helmuth, the Bishop Elect, in the commodious and handsome College for Girls, which he had built and given to the Church. Dr Helmuth was a converted Jew, and an interesting and
Early Days.
46
most hospitable man. The American Church was represented by Bishops Bedell and McCrosky, who also stayed the night with us at the College. At the consecration on the day following I read the Epistle, and joined in the Laying on of Hands. I had arranged for Mrs Nevill and our companions to go on to the Niagara Falls, and proceeding thither from London the engine of the train I was in broke down utterly in the night some miles short of Niagara. I set off to walk the distance, and reaching the bridge which crosses the river below the falls very early in the morning, what was my surprise and delight to find Mrs Nevill standing in the middle of the bridge surveying the mighty gorge. She had expected me to arrive early, and feeling anxious, had risen with a view to going to the station.
From Niagara we proceeded to Quebec, visiting the Montmorency Falls, and, of course, the scenes of the well-known battles, in one of which a certain Valentine Nevill had materially assisted his celebrated general, a versified account of which, by the same Valentine, appeared subsequently in the “ Gentleman’s Magazine.”
Taking passage by the s.s. “ Scandinavia,” bound for Liverpool we passed down the St. Lawrence, and so turned our faces toward; home.
Very shortly after reaching Shelton Rectory I was invited by Bishop Selwyn to spend a night at Lichfield. I don’t think he was sorry at the way in which things had turned out; but in the morning he asked me into his study for a business talk. He told me what he had done as soon as he had heard that I was to be consecrated Bishop of Dunedin on June 4. This was, in short, that he had arranged with Bishop Jenner to resign the Bishopric, and in consideration of such resignation that he had paid to the Bishop the interest of the moneycollected by him years before on behalf of the endowment of the Bishopric up to June 4, 1871, amounting to the sum of £247. He showed me the subscription list and also the form of resignation signed by Bishop Jenner, of which I took a copy. Bishop Selwyn then asked me whether I assented to these arrangements, and I made a somewhat careful reply. I said that I could make no admission’as to the position claimed by Bishop Jenner, and implied by the act of resignation that I could not admit anything which would compromise either my own action or that of the authorities of the Church in New Zealand in the matter of the Bishopric; but that on behalf of the Diocese I felt able to assent to the payment of the interest of the money in consideration of the expense and trouble to which Bishop Jenner had been subjected through no fault of his own. Bishop Selwyn evinced some strength of feeling on this matter by saying that if I had refused to assent to his action he would have withdrawn his own subscription of £lOO, and that he thought that others would follow his example, ne following is a copy of Bishop Jenner’s so-called resignation:— I, Henry Lascelles Jenner, Doctor of Divinity, consecrated Bishop for the occupation of the See of Dunedin in the Colony of New Zealand, do hereby declare that without prejudice to any claim which I may have made or may be advised to make, to the
Early Days
47
emoluments of the said See from the 24th day of August, 1866, to the present date, I resign all future right and title to the Bishopric of Dunedin. Witness my hand this 15th day of June, 1871.
“Henry Lascelles Jenner.”
Shortly after this I wrote to the Archbishop of Canterbury (Dr Tait) informing him that I was a resident within his Province, and requested his permission to officiate therein should I be requested to do so at any time. To this I received a reply inviting me to visit him at Addington; but before the day appointed for the visit arrived I received a letter which declared that it would not be convenient to His Grace to receive me. About this time, observing in the newspaper a notice that the Rev. Alfred Willis was to be consecrated on a certain date to be Bishop of Honolulu, I invited that gentleman to visit me at Shelton Rectory, as I could give him a good deal of information about both the political and religious condition of things in Hawaii. This led to his asking me to take part in his consecration if this might be. I wrote to the Archbishop on this point, expressing the desire of the Bishop Elect, and stating that I proposed to call at Lambeth to pay my respects on a certain day. On presenting myself, however, I was informed by the Archbishop’s secretary, that if I wished to be introduced to His Grace it must be by Bishop Selwyn or someone with whom the Archbishop was acquainted. I retired in some dudgeon, and I am afraid that I made the state of my feelings pretty plain to the Bishop of Lichfield when I wrote to him about the matter. The outcome of this was that a meeting of Bishops was held at Lambeth Palace on February 5, 1872, at which the following resolution was passed:—
“ The Archbishop of Canterbury having announced to the Bishops assembled that he had received from the Bishop of Christchurch a notification of the Rev. Samuel Tarratt Nevill having being elected and consecrated to the See of Dunedin in the Province of New Zealand, and Bishop Jenner having signified to the Archbishop of Canterbury his resignation of the See, it was resolved that the Archbishop of Canterbury be requested to inform the Bishop of Christchurch that the Archbishops and Bishops assembled are ready to recognise the said Samuel Tarratt Nevill as second Bishop of Dunedin, taking, however, for granted that his Grace will receive some more formal announcement of the consecration.”
On receipt of this communication I immediately sent the following reply:—
“ The Bishop of Dunedin begs to acknowledge the receipt of a copy of the resolution passed by the Archbishops and Bishops assembled at Lambeth Palace on the sth day of February requesting the Archbishop of Canterbury to inform the Bishop of Christchurch that the Archbishops and Bishops assembled are ready to recognise the Rev. S. T. Nevill, who has been elected and consecrated to the See of
Early Days
48
Dunedin as second Bishop of Dunedin, taking for granted, however, that his Grace will receive some more formal announcement of the consecration.
“ The Bishop of Dunedin does not presume to forecast what may be the answer which the Primate of New Zealand may think it right to send to the above-mentioned communication, but for himself, while desiring to express the most sincere respect for the persons and position of their Lordships, he must decline to accept the position assigned to him in the above resolution.
“ The Bishop of Dunedin conceives that to allow himself to be recognised by his Grace and their Lordships as second Bishop of Dunedin would be to compromise the dignity of the Ecclesiastical Province of New Zealand in general, and to expose to grave charges all concerned in his own election, confirmation and consecration in particular.”
For the very able, constitutional and dignified reply of the Bishop of Christchurch, Primate of New Zealand, to the resolution of the Archbishops and Bishops of New Zealand, to the resolution of the Archbishops and Bishops on their unauthorised intrusion into the affairs of the Church of New Zealand, I r fer the reader to the Appendix.
I propose to defer remarks which I am tempted to make upon the uncatholic conceptions betrayed by the authorities of the Church of England in relation to other Provinces of the Church until I come to review the legislation of the General Synod of the Province of New Zealand in 1874, and content myself at this time with the observation that, although before this date, several very important decisions of the highest courts in England had defined the relation of the State to the Church on ecclesiastical matters in countries possessed of independent legislatures, the Church herself was very slow in grasping the primitive principle of Catholicity—-viz., that the Church in one country, when in full possession of all her constitutional elements, has tne same inherent powers, divine authority and privilege as the Church in any other, a law which was fully recognised in the Ecumenical Council of Nice in 325, A.D., and was at that time declared to be the ancient rule.
I now, therefore, proceed with my historic narrative, and will mention another incident which took place about this time. The Rev. R. Rawle, Vicar of Tamworth, in the Diocese of Lichfield, had been appointed to a See in the West Indies, and Bishop Selwyn had obtained the unusual privilege of acting as Consecrator by commission from the Archbishop of Canterbury and for the consecration to take place in Lichfield Cathedral. Bishop Selwyn asked me to assist in this function, and sent in my name along with those of the Bishops of Peterborough (McGee, afterwards Archbishop of York), Hereford, Moray and Ross, Primus of Scotland, and Bishops Abraham and Hobhouse. During the ceremony the legal functionary of the Archbishop read the form of the Commission and the names of the officiating Bishops, but to my surprise my name was not mentioned. I was
Early Days
49
seated in the Sanctuary, and being next to Bishop Abraham, I asked him what I ought to do? His reply was “Do as you like!” When the moment arrived for the Laying on of Hands I went forward with the other Bishops to take part in this most sacred act. Bishop Rawle afterwards thanked me expressly for so doing, as he was glad to be so far connected with the Church of New Zealand. As we spent the night at the Palace Lichfield I took the opportunity of explaining to the English Bishops the true position of the Jenner question, about which, in the absence of Bishop Selwyn, I was interrogated. Bishop Atlay, of Hereford, said: "Well we didn’t understand this when we agreed to call you the second Bishop of Dunedin.”
I then set myself to the task of raising funds for the Diocese, and had first to obtain the renewal of grants which had formerly been applied for from S.P.C.K. and an organisation known as the Colonial Bishopric Endowment Fund, towards the endowment of the Bishopric. I had but little difficulty in obtaining £lOOO from each of these societies. I also pleaded with that ever to be honoured and invaluable Society for the Promotion of Christian Knowledge, the ever ready helper for the establishment of the Church in the colonies for assistance in the founding of a Theological College so that the Diocese might be more adequately supplied with clergy and the young men of the country who might desire to devote themselves to the extension of the Kingdom of Christ. For this purpose the Society granted £5OO on the condition that I met that grant with an equal sum. I find from my note book that I succeeded in obtaining a total sum of £587 8s as the result of sermons and lectures delivered all over England, together with my own subscription of £l5O and £5O from a near relative. From the same Society I also obtained towards the passage money of the Rev. Thomas Jackson Smith, who accepted my invitation to work in the Diocese.
I was not equally successful in my pleadings with the Society for the Propagation of the Gospel. I received an intimation that the grant of £lOO per annum which had been made to the Bishop of Christchurch on account of the Diocese of Dunedin had been withdrawn by the Society, and I requested permission to address the Standing Committee with a view to securing the continuance of that grant. I urged that as the Diocese was now only being launched on its own career that there was a far stronger ground for the increase of the grant than for its removal, and I urged the making of a block grant towards the starting of the Diocese, instead of their plan of making a contribution towards the stipend of a particular clergyman whom they might cal! their missionary, which was their custom. I only so far succeeded with the Committee as to obtain the continuance of the £lOO grant for a single year.
In order to prevent my having again to allude to my early efforts to establish needed institutions, or to increase the material power of the Diocese, I will describe in this connection my labours to create a fund from which assistance could be given to the poorer Cures of the
Early Days
50
Diocese, though this was not undertaken until my second visit to England in the year 1878, having learned in the interval, by my experience in Dioceson visitations, the extreme importance of such a fund.
In 1878, then, I once more addressed myself to the Standing Committee of the S.P.C.K., and to show the care taken by that Committee in the consideration of such an application as I made, I will insert here a list of the questions addressed to me by the secretary as to which I had to supply the Committee with information. The secretary says: “ I undersand the Fund aimed at is for the clergy, not for the Bishopric. The Committee would wish to know about the number of the population of the Diocese; what is the present staff of clergy working among them, and what would be an adequate number to supply the wants of the Diocese? Has any fund yet been raised in the Diocese or has any attempt been made to raise one? Is it project for forming a permanent Church Endowment Fund and would it be well supported? Are the contributions of the congregation the only source for the support of the clergy now in existence, or what are the nature and amount of other sources of income? Is there no Government aid? What would you consider a sufficient average income for a clergyman in the Dunedin Diocese? What sum, considering all the circumstances of the case, should be invested as an Endowment Fund to put the incomes of the clergy on such a stable footing as to enable you to procure and retain the services of a sufficient number? How would it be supplemented and how appropriated?”
To these questions I not only returned a written reply, but also had more than one interview with the Committee to explain matters more fully and to answer further questions. I explained that any sum granted, together with all sums raised for the purpose, would be placed in the hands of Diocesan Trustees for investment. Eventually a grant was made on behalf of the poorer Cures of the Diocese of £5OO on condition that the sum of £2,000 was raised to meet it in the Diocese of Dunedin or elsewhere.
Before leaving London I addressed myself to firms and individuals interested in New Zealand, and obtained from them the following very generous subscriptions:—
£ s. d. From Messrs Dalgety and Co. (in consideration of Morven Hills Station) 200 0 0 In consideration of Oamarama (F. G. Dalgety, Esq.) 200 0 0 In consideration of Hawkdun (F. G. Dalgety, Esq.) ... ... 200 0 0 From C. Jacomb, Esq 100 0 0 From Richard Foster, Esq 100 0 0 From Henry Rose, Esq. (instalments of 10 years; promised) 100 0 0 From J. H. Gibbs, Esq, (promised) 100 0 0
And afterwards in New Zealand: — From Henry Le Cren, Esq 100 0 0 From Myself . ... 100 0 0 From G. G. Russell, Esq. 500 0 0 From J. M. Ritchie, Esq 100 0 0 And in small sums 26 17 0
51
Early Days
So that shortly after my return the Trustees—viz.: Messrs Rattray, Ritchie, Spence, Hardy, Hill Jack, Haggitt and Leary—were able tc report that they had invested £1,500 and appealed to the Diocese to increase the Fund.
To resume my narrative from 1871-1872, I need only further say that after resigning my Cure as Rector of Shelton I sold such landed property as I possessed in England, and made the necessary arrangements for a return to New Zealand. I held some confirmations for the Bishop of Lichfield and other English Bishops, and I appointed my good friend, the Hon. and Rev. Latimer Neville (afterwards Lord Braybrooke) to be my Commissary in England. I then gathered together the large party which was to accompany us (25 in all), and we embarked on the “Lady Joscelyn ” at Gravesend, bound for Lyttelton, on August 2, 1872.
The “ Lady Joscelyn ” was a large sailing vessel, and she was under charter to bring out a number of men, known as “Brogden’s men,” to work on the New Zealand railways then first undertaken by the New Zealand Government. There was also on board a great deal of material for the same purpose. My party consisted of the Revs. E. G. Penny, M.A., and T. Jackson Smith (the former selected to be the Principal of the Theological College), Mrs Penny and four children, Mrs Smith, and Messrs Leeson, Dunkley, Withey and Gamble as Theological students. W. N. Leeson was my cousin, of Pembroke College, Cambridge. A number of girls from an orphanage in Jersey accompanied us, and three girls who had been members of Mrs Nevill’s Bible Class at Shelton; my niece (afterwards Sister Etheleen of the Sisters of the Church), her governess and ourselves. We had a short service every morning on week days, with several on the Sundays, held in different parts of the ship, and the captain (Jenkins) was very glad to assist me to organise a school among the Brogden men, as the)' were a rough lot, and he was a little afraid of them. We held this school every morning, but a good many preferred to play cards. One day it was mooted among these men that there was a cargo of spirits on board, and they determined to break into the hold and get at it. The captain came to me in a very anxious state, and said that there was also dynamite and a large quantity of powder on board, and that if these men got drunk there was no knowing what would happen. He asked me to see what I could do to keep the men quiet. I went down to their quarters, and finding a good deal of excitement and a dangerous disposition prevailing, I whispered to my most trusted allies and to Brogden’s men in charge to meet me outside. I then told them I was going to try to persuade these men not to act foolishly, but that if I did not succeed they must be ready to support the captain and ship’s officers, and if needful to seize the ringleaders and overpower them. I then went down quietly to the men, and said: “What are you fellows doing stopping my school? What’s the matter?” One of them shouted: “ We’re going to have some of that whisky; d your school!” “What whisky?” said I. “Down in the hold,” said they. “Oh,” said I, “I’ll tell you what there is in the hold, whether
Early Days
52
there’s any whisky or not. There’s gunpowder and dynamite, and if you go with lights looking for the whisky you may likely enough get blown to a bad place sooner than you ought to get there!” Then some of my friends got up, and finding the crowd in a better humour began to reason with them, saying: “Don’t be fools, chaps,” and so forth, and after a while men from whom I expected no help stood out and said: “Well, I’m agen this sort of thing, and I’ll stand by the Bishop,” and so the thing passed off, much to the satisfaction of all. We reached Lyttelton on November 11, our voyage having occupied 101 days. We came on to Port Chalmers in the steamer “Wellington,” and arriving in the evening. There was once more a little trouble amongst the men. Orders had come for a number of them to be sent on to Invercargill, but they said, “We were to be landed at Dunedin,” and they assembled on the poop and refused to go further. I was again appealed to, and on my telling them that they would reach Invercargill early on the following morning, they offered no further opposition.
Among the two or three deaths which occurred during the voyage was that of a young man, son of Dr Butler, of Ryal Bush, near Invercargill, with whose family we afterwards became well acquainted. He was put on board in an advanced stage of consumption, and we rendered him all the aid and comfort in our power, for which he was most grateful. He lingered till within a short distance of New Zealand, and charged me with religious and loving messages to his father and family.
After a few days’ stay at the Criterion Hotel we all went up to Bishopscourt, although the large stone house, for which I had contracted before leaving Dunedin, was by no means finished. The orphan girls soon obtained situations, and the work of Mr Penny with the students was set on foot.
I had to address myself immediately to the work of the Diocese. The Rev. Richard Coffee was removed from Queenstown to Milton—then called Tokomairiro —and the Rev. T. J. Smith was appointed to succeed him at Queenstown, I had to prepare for my first presidency of the Diocesan Synod, the annual meeting of which was fixed for December u, and on the Bth held my first confirmation in St. Paul’s, Dunedin, with 40 candidates.
Prior to my return to England I had accepted the Rev. Joshua Jones for service at Clyde as the first clergyman for the Manuherikia and Clutha Valleys.
From 1873 to 1878.
I settled down then to the ordinary work of a Bishop in New Zealand in January, 1873. I find that my diary contains a detailed account of that work for the next few years, but it would be tedious to extract therefrom anything more than matters of general interest. I may observe, however, that early in January I held my first con-
53
Early Days.
firmation at Port Chalmers, the Rev. T. L. Stanley having prepared the candidates, 20 in number, and almost all adults. Within that month I also visited Portobello, and afterwards walked over to the Maori Kaik, where I baptised four children and one adult, the latter named Joseph Tahataki. I found the Maoris in some confusion of mind as to what Church they belonged to. They remembered Bishop Selwyn, and some had been baptised by him. Mr Creed, before mentioned at having succeeded Mr Watkin at Karitane, had also visited the Heads, but at the time of my visit a Presbyterian minister had been appointed to the Kaik. The chief, George Grey Taiaroa, thought he belonged to the Wesleyans, but said that if I could supply them with services he would support the Church. Some time afterwards I obtained a Native clergyman named Ngara from the Diocese of Waiapu, and by arrangement with Taiaroa, held a general meeting of the Natives in the Runanga house, at which Taiaroa presided, and it was eventually decided that the church which had been built by the Maoris should be placed in my charge. I was accused in the public prints of having “jumped the Presbyterian claim,” but as the Natives had never acknowledged that claim, the matter soon died down, and the Presbyterian minister was removed. I may add that subsequently visiting Moeraki and Puketeraki I was well received at each place, and eventually, with the warm assistance of Mr Thomas Parata, representative of the Natives of the South Island in Parliament, a very nice church was built at Puketeraki, and dedicated by me under the name chosen by the natives of “ Hui te rangiora” (the place of the Heavenly Assembly). I obtained a sum of £2O from the Government towards this work, in consequence of certain representations which I was able to make. The Synod eventually decided to support the Maori as well as the Melanesian missionary work of the Church, but the gradual dying out of the race in the south of New Zealand has caused the interest in this work to slacken.
As to the establishment of the Bishopric I ought to mention that while still in England I received a letter informing me that the two committees appointed to raise funds for the endowment of the See and the building of a See House having had but little response to a circular they had issued, had each resigned their work, and, as nothing was done, the question of the See House especially became a source of great trouble in successive meetings of the Synod and Standing Committee. As I was not paid the interest agreed upon by way of house rent, I was requested, after some seven years, to regard the original arrangement as ended, and resume full possession of my house and property. I may have again to recur to this subject at a later period of my history.
Although, as I have already remarked, it would be out of the question for me to recount the details of my annual visitations during the long period of my episcopate, I may describe more particularly some of my first journeys, as it will thus give to my readers a better idea of what the formation of a Diocese involved.
First, then, let it be remembered that at this period there were no railways. The first movement in this direction was the construction
Early Days
54
of a wooden line of rails from Invercargill to its port at the Bluff; but the rate at which one might travel on this line may be guessed from the following story which was related to me as a fact;— The driver of the engine was accustomed to pick up passengers on the way, if he saw any, and one morning, seeing a woman carrying a basket of clothes upon her head, he pulled up and asked her whether he could give her a lift, to which she replied: “ Na, na, I’m in a hurry the morn!”
The time of my return to New Zealand synchronises with the commencement of railway building by the Government, which had borrowed a large sum of money for this purpose under the guidance of Sir Julius Vogel, a Hebrew gentleman of ability and enterprise, who had come to the front at the time. The large amount of money being spread throughout the country by the letting of contracts for various sections of lines gave rise to much speculation and consequent inflation of the values of land and materials, a matter which was unfortunate for me, since the moneys I had brought with me were, even under what I imagined to be the best advice available, invested at prices which have never since been realised. What was, however, of much greater importance was the subsequent reaction which for many years rendered it most difficult to make progress in Church work. All classes of people had borrowed money at high price, looking for a continuance of prosperity. Many were ruined, others greatly straitened and rendered despondent, while the few who had speculated successfully left the country to enjoy their wealth in their fatherland. The building of railways, moreover, though of so great advantage at large, nevertheless, by their centralising influence, greatly injured the smaller towns, reducing the population and injuring the tradespeople, so that not only were Church enterprises impeded, but even the maintenance of the few clergy already established in Cures became a matter of much difficulty. Again, the construction of railways was to the injury of the roads. None of the roads had at that time other than a clay surface, or at most were only metalled for short distances and in patches. The carting of materials for railway building therefore cut them up so deeply as to make progress in riding or driving a very slow and dreary business, especially in wet weather. Some journeys which can now be accomplished in a day, would at that time occupy three days, and very long ones at that; the coaches often starting at 4 o’clock, which meant being up at half past three. For these reasons I preferred, when possible, to travel on horseback, putting ray things up into a “ swag ” and strapping them to the front of my saddle, sometimes borrowing a horse from one station to another, and then turning him loose to find his own way back, which they always did, sooner or later. I find from notes of my first journey in 1873 that I started from Bishopscourt on February I in company with one of my students, who helped me with my bags, and we walked to Otakia, some 15 miles, to stay the night at the home of William Palmer, the same old whaler who had acted as pilot to Bishop Selwyn in his voyage from the Otago Heads to Stewart Island about 30 years before. Mr Palmer had then a nice farm, and his house was on the top of the hill, sheltered by a clump of bush. We enjoyed a good chat about Selwyn and his
Early Days.
55
voyaging in Foveaux Straits to the islands west of Stewart Island and to Riverton, which latter place I intended to make the end of my tour. In the morning Mr Withy—my companion—returned to Bishopscourt, while Mr Palmer accompanied me to a point of land on the main road which he offered me as the site of a church, promising also a subscription towards the stipend of a clergyman if I could place one there.
From Otakia I walked on to McKeggs, at Henley, to see the 10acre section of land given to the Church by the late Dr Williams, who formerly resided there. Nearly all the land on the Taieri plain and hill-sides being occupied by Presbyterians, it has not been found possible to establish churches at these places. I took up the coach from Henley to Tokomairiro (Milton), where I stayed over the Sunday, and inducted the Rev. R. Coffey, M.A., to the parish, and on the Monday held a meeting of the Vestry and discharged other business. Next day I drove to Balclutha and visited the whole neighbourhood of Inchclutha and Kaitangata, and formed a church committee, appointing Mr R. Williams, son of the late Dr W., church officer, assisted by Messrs Renner and Hutchins, and on the Friday proceeded by coach to Popotunoa (Clinton), and stayed the night with Mr Steele, and made inquiries as to a site for a church. Mr Steele had been with Mr Gordon Rich at Wairuna, and had some weird stories ot carrying flour on his back all the way from Dunedin before the road was formed, and getting almost set fast in bogs. On the Saturday I proceeded to Invercargill, where I held a confirmation, visited the Sunday school, and took other service. I spent the whole week in Invercargill addressing a social gathering in the Town Hall, interviewing the Vestry and urging repairs to the church and the acquisition of a vicarage, I also went to Ryall Bush, and consecrated the churchyard there for burials, and visited all church families near, appointing Mr C. C. Sproull to be lay reader. On the Saturday I went to Riverton. The coach at that time, and for some time afterwards, went by the sea beach, and in one place there was considerable danger of quicksands. We turned into Riverton through the Native Reserve. I spent some days in Riverton, where the Rev. W. F. Oldham, M.A., was vicar, and the small wooden church was one of the first built in the Diocese. The harbour, although only available for small vessels, had not only been much used by whalers, but when gold was found at Orepuki, Wakatipu and other places, Riverton became a place of some commercial importance for a time. The beautiful estuary and wooded scenery will always render it attractive. I held a confirmation and other services on Sunday, February 16, and during the week following, visited the Maori Kaik when old Solomon, whom Bishop Selwyri had made a sort of lay reader, was still vigorous, and he showed me the remnant of the Maori prayer books Bishop Selwyn had given him, and he assured me that he had held service in the little building, which was the original school, daily when not away from home. In answer to my inquiries as to the existence of an older race of Natives in the unexplored districts of the west, he replied: “O, you mean those fire men,” and he explained that long ago when men went bevond the lake Holoko, or Horoko as he pronounced it, they some-
5'
Early Days.
times saw smoke rising among the trees and perhaps found the remains of a fire, but never saw any men. I asked about this in consequence of what was said in Captain Cook’s account of his visit to the Sounds, and his picture of the two woolly-haired Natives on what he named Indian Island in Dusky Sound. It is probable that this older race was one with the Mariories of the Campbell Islands, who are too likely soon to suffer the same fate as their southern relatives. Before leaving Riverton I was publicly welcomed at a social gathering in the Oddfellows’ Hall, on which occasion a warm-hearted greeting was given me by the Rev. Mr McGillivray, the Presbyterian minister, one of whose daughters had married Mr Oldham, and Mr McGillivray caused some amusement by stating in his speech that if all his daughters married English churchmen it would not grieve him much. More than one afterwards did so.
On my return to Invercargill I purchased a horse and rode him home to Dunedin, reaching Popotunoa (Clinton) on Saturday evening. I held Divine Service in the Royal Hotel there on the Sunday morning and preached. In the afternoon of that day I rode the 25 miles to Balclutha, and held a second service in Barr’s Hall there; continuing my journey on the Monday. To show the then unfenced condition of the country, on reaching Mr Allan’s farm, near what is now called Allant on, I got him to pilot me over the Taieri River, and then made my way across country and over the hills by the “Half-way Bush” road to my house at Roslyn.
On March 9, 1873, I ordained Mr John Dewe to the Diaconate. He had studied at Cambridge with a view to Holy Orders, but the death of his father before he had taken his degree led to his coming to New Zealand to push his way as a farmer. He had, however, warmly supported the work of the Church, and was a member of the Rural Deanery Board, and of the first Synod of the Diocese. His eldest daughter subsequently became the wife of Mr John Herbert, of Ardmore, and their family are well-known land owners of that neighbourhood. Shortly afterwards I drove with Mr and Mrs Dewe to Moa Flat, spending the night with the Dewes in a house lent to them by Mr Kitchen, then the manager of that station for Mr Joseph Clark, of Melbourne. The next day, Sunday, we drove to Roxburgh, eight miles distant. The road, by the side of the Molyneux River, was very rough, being rocky. I celebrated the Holy Communion in a hired room, there being as yet no church, and there were 12 communicants.
Wishing to explore the large central district lying to the southwest of the Molyneux Valley and beyond the ranges, Mr Dewe drove Mrs Dewe and myself to Ardmore, near Kelso on the Monday. We called at Mr Kitchen’s new station, and passing over by Dunrobin and by the Crookston district, reached Mr Herbert’s residence. On the following day we left for Switzers, a mining township situated upon a hill above the Waikia River. Our road was a mere track. We had to ford the Pomahaka River and make our way through the Leithen Gorge, the distance to Switzers being about 34 miles. When we reached the Bank of New Zealand at that place, where we proposed to stay the night, we found Mr Davidson, the bank manager, was
Early Days.
52
away with his wife visiting friends about five miles off. Mrs Lloyd, the mother of Mrs Davidson and of Mrs Stevenson, of Palmerston, was on the point of leaving the house to spend the evening with the wife of the warden when we arrived. A messenger was despatched to Hyde Home Station, where the Davidsons were staying, and they returned in the dark. Young Mr Brodrick, a son of Mr Geo. Brodrick, of Caversham, was a clerk in the bank, and he very kindly surrendered his bedroom to me for two nights; the Dewes being received by a resident in the township. On the following day, bidding farewell to my kind friends the Dewes, I went over to Hyde Home to baptise the infant sons of Mr Chapman, the son of Judge Chapman, of Dunedin; and in the afternoon I ministered the Sacrament of Holy Baptism in the schoolroom at Switzers; and in the evening held a short service and preached. One of the children baptised at this time was Gerard, the infant son of Mr and Mrs Davidson, who proved to be a sort of firstfruits of my work; since in after years I was permitted to contribute to his spiritual history by confirming him and ordaining him, both to the Diaconate and the Priesthood, and placing him in charge of a district.
I will continue my account of this journey that it may serve as an illustration of the many journeys taken in the annual visitation of the Diocese in the years before the construction of railways throughout the greater part of it. The characteristic difference between my earlier visitations and those of later years being that before railways reached the more distant towns and villages, I came into much more personal contact with the people, often staying several days in a place of any importance, as coaches usually ran three days a week, thus arriving, say, on Friday I could not proceed before Monday, and if engagements involved the staying over the Monday, it was Wednesday, before I could go on. In these intervals I usually visited all the church people of the place, or neighbourhood, and especially the newly-con-firmed in their homes. When I travelled on horseback, as I often did, with my robes and baggage in “ a swag ” on my saddle, I made a point of turning off the main road to call at the house of every church person I could hear of, and if I baptised any children in homes far distant from a church or clergyman, I gave them a written certificate to be kept for presentation to any clergyman in whose parish they might afterwards reside. In the longer rides I sometimes stayed the night with a Presbyterian family, and it was not uncommon to be asked to baptise their children also, and when the circumstances seemed special, I usually did this after some explanation of Church teaching with parents. Railway travelling put an end to all this, and instead of an absence from home of, perhaps, three weeks, when a daily service of trains existed, it became usual just to spend the Sunday at some particular parish, staying at the vicarage and returning perhaps on the Monday without even the meetings with the church officers, which had always been the custom of my earlier days.
Returning now to Switzers, and my exploration of the interior of Otago, I desired to intercept the coach which plied from Invercargill to Queenstown on certain days, but the question was, how to get over
Early Days
53
the considerable stretch of country which lay between. However, after riding to “Winding Creek” and baptising two children of the resident there, I found him so ready to assist me that he offered the use of a horse and a man to drive me as far as to Castle Rock, near to which the coach should pass. Accepting this kindness we went across country, calling at Mr David McKellar’s, who, however, with his family, were away from home, then at Ardlussa, where a Mr McNeill gave us lunch, and somewhat late in the afternoon kindly rode with us some seven miles through a hilly part in which no track could be seen through the tall red tussock. He took us to the top of the ridge, from which Castle Rock could be seen in the distance, and gave us directions as to the crossing of the Oreti River at “ the Elbow,” a point at which the township of Lumsden was subsequently founded. We could only make slow progress, as in the absence of a road we encountered rocky places and streams, and our cart having no springs the constant bumping over tussock was a painful process. It was dark when we reached the fence by which the Castle Rock Station was enclosed, and we had no little difficulty in finding the entrance. Our arrival at near 9 o’clock was therefore a surprise to the shepherd and his wife, whom we found in charge, Mr and Mrs Matthew Holmes being away from home. Just at first we were a little doubtful about our reception, but after a while the good couple became satisfied that we were quite respectable, and such refreshment as was was provided for man and horse, as well as beds for the night. We were to be congratulated that the couple had not retired before our arrival.
Finding that the following day, Friday, was not the day for the coach to Kingston, my driver decided to take me there himself, and we started for the 40-mile drive at 6 o’clock a.m. I caught a small boat for Queenstown, and dismissed my jehu with a suitable reward, I arrived at Queenstown at 8 o’clock, and stayed with the resident magistrate, being met by the Rev. T. J. Smith and others.
Sunday, March 23. —Rode to Arrowtown in the morning and took the first service in the new church, returning to Queenstown for confirmation in the evening.
On the Wednesday I held a visitation of the Vestry, and afterwards at a public service instituted the Rev. T. J. Smith to the parish of St. Peter, Queenstown, with Arrowtown, etc.
On Thursday I took the coach to Clyde, and during the rest of the week I visited the houses of all church people in Clyde and Alexandra, in company with the Rev. Joshua Jones, who had duly arrived in accordance with my arrangements. I found, however, that the Alexandra people refused to contribute anything towards the stipend of Mr Jones because he lived in Clyde, nor would they even attend the services which he had been conducting in the schoolroom at Alexandra. Clyde, which, when the diggings were at their height, had a population of about 3,000 persons, for the most part living in tents, had by this time dwindled down to a village of probably less than 300 inhabitants; but the warden’s residence, the police station,
54
Early Days.
and other Government offices, were at Clyde, and such religious services as had been held were conducted there in a dilapidated building half of iron and half of wood. There had never been a resident clergyman in either Clyde, Alexandra, or Cromwell before Mr Jones. A house had been built half way between Clyde and Alexandra, intended for a Presbyterian minister, but it was unoccupied at the time of my visit, though very shortly afterwards a minister was stationed in Alexandra itself. Mr Vincent Pyke, a man of great enterprise and very considerable ability, was the resident warden at Clyde, and he had been accustomed to conduct Divine services from time to time under licences from the Bishop of Christchurch. During this visit to Clyde I held a meeting of the church people, at which it was decided to purchase the house and grounds, the private property of Mr Pyke, which from that date has been recognised as the vicarage of the parish.
On Sunday, March 30, 1873, I held the first confirmation service ever held in Central Otago, and of the 15 candidates confirmed, all but two were married persons, and all but three were males. This service was held at 8 o’clock in the morning, while at 11 o’clock I celebrated the Holy Eucharist, and preached; all the confirmees communicating. In the afternoon I rode to Cromwell to hold a service there in the evening.
It may be worth while, as affording a picture of the times, for me to interrupt my narrative by a brief description of this visit to the mining town of Cromwell, then consisting, like most mining towns, of little more ,than a line of hotels and banks on either side of the main street. To the princi'pal one of these hotels Mr Jones and I proceeded, and put up our horses. We were expected by the good landlady, who assigned to our use a private part of the hotel originally built for the reception of Governor Bowen, who had spent a night at Cromwell. Mrs Kidd and her husband were each of them characters in their way. To say Mrs Kidd and her husband is to put matters in their proper order, since she was both physically and mentally the dominant power. He, indeed, was a sort of plaything to his wife, who carefully dressed the shining ringlets which hung upon his shoulders; a small man, yet popular, as he sat in a wooden armchair cracking jokes and giving out stories in his bar parlour, while his large wife managed the business and kept order with good effect. At this particular juncture a company of strolling players had arrived in Cromwell, and had engaged the hall, which was connected with the hotel, to give an entertainment on the Monday evening. As there was a considerable noise of hammering going on in the hall that afternoon, and I was to hold my service there in the evening, I went to see what was going on, and on entering the building found the members of the company busily engaged in preparing the stage for their performance, erecting a screen with green paper hangings and tawdry curtains and other paraphanalia; but in front of me was Mrs Kidd herself, arms a kimbo, haranging the workers in the following terms: “Now then, you there! What are you doing? Don’t you know we’re going to have church here to-night, and
Early Days
60
you can’t go on putting up your things! D’ye think were going to have our Bishop a’ masquerading about among your gew-gaws! Take ’em down; take ’em down, I tell you; and quick, too.” Such was the woman of the day on the goldfields. She and her husband, with his curls and his ear-rings, were prominent at the service, and behaved reverently. A good many years afterwards I gave the Holy Sacrament to good Mrs Kidd before her death in the hospital in Dunedin.
Before returning to Clyde on the following day, finding that a surveyor was engaged in laying off a township on the terrace above the main road, Mr Jones and I, accompanied by a Mr Fraer and other residents, chose a site for a future church and vicarage, and I appointed a church committee to raise the purchase money and aid Mr Jones in his work. We returned to Clyde in the afternoon, and in the evening I publicly instituted the Rev. Joshua Jones to the charge, and licensed Mr Wilson to act as lay reader. I may here say that I suppose that Clyde had come to be regarded as a parish on account of its once large population; but I can discover no record of its having been so constituted by any act of the Rural Deanery Board, or the Synod of the Diocese, nor had any clergyman been appointed thereto.
On Tuesday, April I, Mr Christopher, manager of the Bank of New Zealand at Clyde, kindly lent me his horse for some days, and Mr Jones and I set off on a missionary tour of the Manuherikia and the Maniototo valleys; Mr Jones intending to leave me at Naseby, he himself to lead back Mr Christopher’s horse the more than 50 miles. At the small mining township of Blacks (Ophir) we called upon the resident warden—Mr Carew. We were hospitably entertained at lunch by the banker and his wife, Mr and Mrs W. L. Simpson, whom I was afterwards to know so well. Riding on, I was able to localise the several smaller diggings lying in gullies at the foot of the Dunstan Range. The names given to such places by the miners were indicative of their success or otherwise in their search for gold—Sugarbowl, Dtybread, etc. We spent the night at the Blackstone Hill Station, rendered attractive by the plantation of young trees put in by the proprietors—viz., the Rolland brothers,—and on the following morning rode across to the Hawkdun Station, then managed by Mr Allan on behalf of Messrs Dalgety and Co. Mrs Allen was the daughter of a Devonshire clergyman, and they kindly pressed us to sta) ? to lunch with them. In the afternoon we continued our journey to Naseby, arriving there early in the evening. As an illustration of the rarity of clergy in the interior of Otago at the time, I may repeat the surprised exclamation of one of a group of men standing outside of the first of the long line of hotels of which the township seemed to consist. As we began to descend the main street from the top of the hill by which we entered, this man shouted to his fellows, “Well I’m blessed, if ’ere aint two crows a coming. I never seed one in Naseby before.” There were two similar groups of men at the door of each hotel as we passed, and jocular, but not unfriendly, remarks proceeded from each. One man, hearing that it was the Bishop who had arrived, approaching ray horse, said: “Look here, Bishop; I’ll shout for you,
56
Early Days
I never shouted for a Bishop.” “No,” said I, “and if you wait till you shout for me you never will, but thank you all the same!” “Sarves you right,” exclaimed others, “ sarves you right for your impudence. Well done, Bishop!” We stayed at the Victoria Hotel. Mr George, the proprietor, was a churchman, and Mayor of Naseby, and in the evening saw the warden, Mr Robinson, Mr Grummit and others; but was then met by a telegram urging my immediate visit to Wanganui, in the North Island, my brother, the Vicar there, being dangerously ill. This led to my starting early the following morning to return to Dunedin. My conveyance was a sort of express cart, and we passed through Kyeburn and Hyde, reaching Mcßaes at night very cold, as there was much snow. The interior divisions of the hotel were only canvas, so I heard all the noise made by the miners who spent the night there, and this, added to the intense cold at the top of the hill, prevented sleep and made me glad to get away at 5 o’clock in the morning for Palmerston, where I caught the coach, and arrived in Dunedin in the evening.
My journey to Wanganui occupied about a month, and my brother having somewhat recovered, I found that I was able to resume my work of visiting the Diocese on May 18.
It is, of course, impossible for me to give an account in detail of my journeyings throughout the Diocese for the best part of 50 years; but, in further illustration of what travelling meant in the early days, I may add that I find the following entry in my diary relative to this recommencement of my visitation of 1873: —“Started for Oamaru on May 18 by coach from Manse Street at 7 o’clock on Saturday morning. Roads very bad, and did not arrive until 9.30 in the evening.” I find that on my return from Oamaru I consecrated the new church at Palmerston, and subsequently revisited Naseby, and introduced the Rev. E. Williams, who, with his family, had been sent out from England by my commissary, the Hon. and Rev. Latimer Neville, and this, including St. Bathans, completed my visitation for the year as far as distant places were concerned. There are, of course, many incidents connected with my many journeys which are of some interest, and particularly my visits to England by the different routes employed; but in the later years these became more ordinary in character, and I dismiss this subject of travelling by an expression of devout thankfulness to Almighty God that so far from having to suffer the experiences recorded by St. Paul, I was mercifully preserved through all from any accident more serious than the overturning of a buggy and some consequent cuts and bruises, and this in spite of the fact that in the early days there were many dangerous places, both in coach roads and bridle tracks which have since been avoided by the opening of railways or the construction of new roads.
In December, 1873, I ordained W. N. Leeson and C. Withy, placing the former at Port Chalmers and the latter at Cromwell to assist Mr Jones.
ECCLESIASTICAL AUTONOMY.
The General Synod of 1874.
This Session of the General Synod was, I think, the most interesting as well as one of the most important of the many in which I have taken a part either as a member of the bench of Bishops or as President of the Synod itself. I have already indicated in a former chapter that the Synod of 1874 was largely engaged in the further consideration of constitutional questions which increasingly demanded elucidation and recognition, as the true relation of the Provincial Church to that which gave origin to it became better known. The idea that change of locality involved little or no change in ecclesiastical relationships was, I suppose, formerly almost universal. Stated in other words, the general idea was that the Church in a colony was an integral part of the Church of England, even though that colony was removed by a distance of half the circumference of the globe from the country of its origin. This idea was not confined to the unlearned laity, but included —as in some places it does still—all ranks of church people. The fundamental error in this conception is that it starts from a wrong basis. The Church of one country is itself only a section of the Catholic Church, and to regard such sectional Church as extending, in its own name, over the whole world, is to transform it into a sect. The genus, so to speak, is the Catholic Church, the species the Church in a particular country. When, therefore a churchman leaves the Church in one country he ceases to be a member of the Church of that country; but he does not cease to be a member of the Catholic Church, and he carries his catholicity with him, but not the specific name of the Church in the country which he left. An illustration of this truth, on a small scale, may be found in the removal of an individual from one parish to another within a city. He leaves the parish of St. Peter for the parish of St. Paul, and he properly carries with him his privileges and his obligations from one parish to the other, by the transfer of himself, and moreover he has no right to call himself a parishioner of St. Peter’s when he lives in St. Paul’s, and in point of fact, this calling himself such, should he insist on doing so, does not affect the fact. This then was the fundamental error which still, more or less, dominated the minds of the honoured Fathers of our Church constitution. The idea of integral identity had indeed received some shock from the declarations of eminent legal authorities in England. When Bishop Selwyn went to England in 1854 for the purpose of obtaining such powers of selfgovernment as the church people of New Zealand had found to be necessary, neither he nor they contemplated any separation from the Church as established in England; the Bishop indeed contemplated the obtaining of such special liberties as the case of New Zealand required by the passing of an Act of Parliament which should grant and define
63
Ecclesiastical Autonomy.
the same; but this was found to be impracticable. When legislative powers had been granted to a colony it was held to be an encroachment upon such powers for the English Parliament to legislate on behalf of any religious body within that colony. Subsequent pronouncements made it dear indeed that the Church, as a society, in a country where she is not recognised as the established religion, must be governed, as any other society, by the voluntary obedience of her members to her rules. Ihe basis of voluntary compact then became accepted as the basis upon which the Church of New Zealand must found her constitution; but the discovery of these positions did not disabuse the minds of our founders of the idea that we remained an integral part of the Church of England from a church point of view. The reigning Sovereign (“the Crown”) was supposed to be still the supreme head of the Church everywhere, and the Convocation of Canterbury still to be the authority for the Articles and Formularies. The first of these positions found support from the decision of Lord Campbell, Chief Justice of England, in November, 1857. He says, in reference to the Bishopric of Christchurch, that “ The Bishopric of Christchurch in New Zealand has been created purely by the Prerogative of the Crown,” and this prevalent idea is exhibited in the language of the so-called fundamental provisions themselves, wherein the framers of our Constitution described the Church in New Zealand as a “ Branch of the United Church of England and Ireland in New Zealand, and declared that she should have no power to alter any formularies of the above-named Church or version of the Bible until such had been adopted with the consent of the Crown or Convocation, nor to alter any rule unless a licence was granted from the Crown to her to do so.
It is also worthy of notice that in the general Synod of 1868, when a Bill for the Constitution of the Diocese of Dunedin was under discussion, the Bishop of Nelson moved—“ That the Bill should be postponed on the ground that no evidence had been given to the Synod that the assent of the Crown had been given to the erection of this new See.”
Note also my replies to the Questions from Secretaries of State as to a Church Property Bill.
The Synod of 1874 derives its special character from the fact that several of its enactments, and the lengthy and sometimes strenuous discussions connected with those enactments, arose out of the increasing conviction that the framers of the Constitution started on too narrow a basis in attempting to restrict the inherent liberties of a Provincial Church. In one of my addresses to the General Synod I ventured to express this opinion very strongly by describing their' action in this matter as an “Ecclesiastical immorality.” It is quite true that, as the idea of separate existence began to possess the mind of the Church, fears and apprehensions also began to disturb it, and it is not unlikely that such feelings had no little to do with the enactment ■sf those fundamental provisions. Even in this Synod of 1874 the dread of the recognition of full autonomy was sometimes strongly expressed. I remember that one excellent man, in the course of a
Ecclesiastical Autonomy
64
fervid address, exclaimed: “ I was born a member of the Church of England, I have lived a member of the Church of England, I will die a member of the Church of England, I will be buried a member of the Church of England.” Nor were even the most ardent supporters of the principle of provincial liberty desirous of making any alteration in the services of formularies of the Church. A Bill was even prepared with the object of making it impossible to effect any changes without consideration in two Sessions of the General Synod and the assent of the Synods of each Diocese. The circumstance which called forth tnis earnest inquiry into our true position was the disestablishment of tne Church of Ireland by the English Parliament in 1869, which certainly seemed to call for a change in our designation, if if did not involve the arrival of the very contingency alluded to in Clause 4 of the Constitution. A Committee of the Synod was set up to consider and report upon the effect of this change, and also of the then recent decisions of law courts in England on the position of the Church in the colonies The report of this committee eventually gave rise to the enactment of a Statute entitled “ A Statute for making necessary alterations in the formal organisation of the Church.” Our legislation was at that time effected in the form of the enactment of statutes, and such statutes had a preamble which set forth the grounds and purposes of the statute itself. The preambles to this, and also to a statute which was passed for “ the adoption of a New Table of Lessons,” declared as the grounds of them that the assumptions on which the Constitution of the Church was framed —viz: “ The relation of the Crown to the Church in the colony of New Zealand and that of the Church as an integral part of the Church established in England did not then, and do not now, exist, therefore,” etc. The statute first named, after authorising certain alterations in the Ordinal—such as the omission of the Royal Mandate for the Consecration of a Bishop, and reference to the ordinance of the realm in the ordination of clergy—afterwards appended certain explanation words to the twentyfirst and thirty-seventh of the 39 articles; but its most significant enactment was to direct the disuse in the future of the designation embodied in the Constitution as “ This Branch of the United Church of England and Ireland ” and to substitute that of “ The Church of the Province of New Zealand, commonly called the Church of England.” It was to this formal change of name that the good man above referred to made his emphatic protest. It is more remarkable, however, that when the news of this alteration reached England no less a person than Sir William Martin, one of the framers of the Constitution, wrote a pamphlet, of which he kindly sent me a copy, in which he argued that it would have been preferable to assign to the Provincial Church the title of “ The Church of ENGLAND IN New ZEALAND,” which I had argued that it was not, and on truly Catholic principles it would not be.
The members of the Synod who took the most prominent part in these enactments were the Hon. Mr Sewell, a member of the English bar and also the Government of New Zealand, and the Yen. Archdeacon Harper, M.A., a son of the President of the Synod.
65
Ecclesiastical Autonomy.
The only matter which I need mention as showing the mind of the members of this Session of the Synod on constitutional questions was the passing, with complete unanimity, of the following resolution as the answer of the New Zealand Church to the decision of Archbishop Tait and certain English Bishops to recognise me as successor to Bishop Jenner; my personal answer to which I have already recorded. I think it worth while to insert this resolution in full. It states: “ That it having been brought to the notice of this Synod ” (the Primate had placed the Archbishop’s communication on the Table of the Synod) “ that the Archbishop of Canterbury and certain Bishops of England have formally recognised Dr Jenner as the FIRST Bishop of the See of Dunedin, apparently in disregard of the judgment of this Synod formally pronounced on Dr Jenner’s claims, this Synod, in exercise of its undoubted authority, having carefully examined the circumstances under which Dr Jenner claims to be regarded as having been the first Bishop of the See of Dunedin, declares that Dr Jenner not having been appointed to the See of Dunedin in accordance with the laws of the Church in New Zealand ought not to be regarded as having been such first Bishop, and this Synod doth recognise the Right Rev. Samuel Tarratt Nevill, D.D., as the present and FIRST Bishop of the See of Dunedin.”
The history of the Sessions of the General Synod held in 1871 and in 1874 displays clearly the growing conviction of the mind of the best informed among the leaders of the Church that the conceptions upon which the “Fundamental Provisions” of the Church Constitution were based were themselves fundamentally wrong. It was granted that the enactment of those provisions might find some justification in the desire to allay the disturbance of feeling on the part of many excellent people in those early stages of settlement in a new country at the discovery of their ecclesiastical new birth and their fears of the freedom of separate existence; but the breakdown of the political and legal defences upon which the Church had been taught to rely for the security of her discipline and the purity of her faith brought home to the more thoughtful that the truer defence of “ the Church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth ” was her intrinsic nature as the body of Christ and her inherent power as the Temple of the Holy Ghost. It is doubtless true that the honoured framers of the Constitution were not less persuaded of these spiritual truths than were the members of the Synod referred to, but it is not equally true that they were right in the introduction of ties and props of an artificial nature.
I may here add that I have always deeply felt the responsibility of my position as obliging me to assist fearlessly our Catholic inheritance of freedom, and have written and preached much in illustration of it. When, in 1908, I was requested by the authorities of the Pan-Anglican Congress to write a paper for its consideration upon “ The Anglican Communion in Relation to its Parts,” I said in my response, “ I think it is beyond dispute that so soon as the Church within a particular area contains within itself all the elements necessary
Early Diocesan Work
66
to its due order and perpetuation, that Church is inherently free from external control.” And when in one of the meeting of the Lambeth Conference it was proposed to constitute “ a Tribunal of Reference,” to consist of the Archbishop of Canterbury, assisted by certain advisers, I felt it my duty to oppose the proposal, not only on the ground that the Conference had no authority to “ constitute” any organisation which should have a binding force upon the Church in any country, but also because even to formulate the body proposed would be to give more formal authority to appeals to the Chair of Canterbury than had ever been formally given to appeals to that of Rome itself, and I had to say that, with all respect to the learned prelates of England, I did not think that the ecclesiastical conditions of the State Church in that country were such as to give us much encouragement to appeal to its decisions. The truth upon this matter is that the security of any Church is for it to “ continue in the Apostles’ doctrine and fellowship and in the breaking of the bread and prayer.” Any Church, or Province of the Church, so doing may well be trusted to manage its own internal affairs, since it may look with confidence to receive the promised guidance of God the Holy Ghost.
EARLY DIOCESAN WORK.
1874 to 1878
At the close of the General Synod of 1874, returning from Wellington, I resumed my Diocesan work early in June. One of my first engagements was the holding of a confirmation service at St. Barnabas, Warrington, at which nine candidates were presented by the Rev. T. L. Stanley. One of these was a full-blood Maori female, aged 19, named Williams, and two others of the name of Parker were half-castes.
On St. Peter’s Day the Rev. Wilfrid Nevill Leeson, late of Pembroke College, Cambridge, was ordained Deacon. Mr C. F. Withey, who was also one of the original students of Selwyn College, was examined with Mr Leeson, but, having been ill, desired more time for study before ordination. I placed Mr Leeson at Holy Trinity, Port Chalmers, as the church there had been opened in the previous April but had no minister. Mr Leeson continued to live with us at Bishopscourt, which was then also the Divinity College, and rode a horse of mine on his visits to the Port. Mr Withey was ordained on October 9 following. I had previously visited Balclutha, Kaitangata, and Clinton to secure a stipend, and was able to offer Mr Withey the stipend of £2OO a year. I held meetings at each place arid formed committees, appointing a church officer as chairman of each.
Early Diocesan Work
67
The Diocesan Synod of 1874 was held on September 30, and to it I explained the legislation of the General Synod. On October 31 I started on a visitation of the north, staying at Waikouaiti and Palmerston for confirmation. While at the former place I rode over to the Maori Kaik at Puketeraki. A notable marriage between one of Mr Parata’s daughters and young Kihau, the chief at Ruapuke, was followed by a great feast said to have cost £lOO. Henri Mawhera, of Moeraki, was present. He was a Native who had gone about with Bishop Selwyn in a schooner, when Selwyn first visited Otago. From Palmerston, after spending a night at Sir F. D. Bell’s at Waihemo. On the following day the coach by which I had intended to go on to Naseby was too full to take me, so I gladly accepted the kind invitation of Sir Francis to stay another night, and to ride one of his horses to Naseby the next day. By this arrangement I was able to escape staying a night at the wretched wooden shed where the accommodation was, as I knew, from former experience, the worst in Otago. Badly built and unlined, the wind, which blew strongly over a snowcovered mountain, found ready entrance between the boards, and the bed consisted of a wooden framework with a piece of canvas stretched across it, and only one sheet, which, by being folded, served both to lie upon and to cover the unfortunate occupant, who had only a small blanket over him in addition. The misery of the night may be imagined without the disturbing society of a company of chattering Chinamen, and still noisier miners, who made little pretence of going to bed at all, preferring to obtain a degree of warmth by the combined effects of a fire and the raw spirits with which they were plentifully supplied in the bar.
At Naseby I preached morning and evening of the Sunday in the Masonic Hall, and on Monday, November 9, laid the foundation stone of a church to be built of concrete, the walls to be 14 inches thick and 10 feet high, and to cost 30/- per cubic yard. The church committee, at a meeting held at the house of Mr Walter Inder, reported the raising of £1,197 since the arrival of the Rev. E. Williams, whom I had accompanied to Naseby in the previous August. On the nth I rode to the Hawkdun Station, then in charge of Mr Allen, who, with his charming wife, were Devonshire people. Mr Inder had lent me a horse, which was to be left at the house of Mr Samuel Inder, his brother, at Hills Creek, about 25 miles from Naseby. On arrival there I found Mr S. Inder had only one horse, which he could lend me, a very high and only partly broken in young animal. Upon this, however, I travelled the intervening seven miles without difficulty, but on arriving at the five-barred gate, which formed the entrance to the private grounds of the homestead, as I leaned over from the saddle in the endeavour to unfasten the gate, the young beast, getting impatient, took a standing leap and, as was not to be wondered at, smashed the top bar of the gate with his hind legs, and this in full sight of Mr Allen, who was hastening to my assistance, having seen my approach from the window of the house. Happily for me I did not lose my seat. I mention this incident in detail because it happened some time after-
Early Diocesan Work
68
wards that the Allens dined at Bishopscourt, and on bidding us goodnight at the close of the evening Mr Allen accidentally thrust his elbow through the glass door which separated the hall from the vestibule of my house, and he had the wit to turn to me exclaiming; “Well, now were quits; this is tit for tat.”
In order to prevent this record of my lifework becoming nothing more than an account of trivial incidents, I must content myself with just so brief an outline of these tours of visitation of different parts of the Diocese as will suffice to show the character of the work of the early days, the long absences from home involved in them, and the warm welcome given by persons of all classes and all denominations to one who presented himself to them as a representative of the Christian religion, at a time when there were large areas of the country without churches or resident ministers of any name. To continue my account of the places and persons reached in this round, I may say that I found it impossible to carry out my design of pushing my way through from the head of the Manuherikia through the pass at between the Dunstan Range and Mount St. Bathans, and so accepted the offer of an ancient Rosinante which was to carry me as far as Mr Handiside’s station at (sic). This was accomplished, and Mr Handiside, who had recently married a relative of my good friends the McLarens, of Dunedin, insisted on my spending the night with tßem. This I did, and was sorry to hear shortly afterwards that my new friends had removed to the North Island. The following morning, on a more vigorous steed, I pursued my journey down the valley of the Manuherikia on my way to Clyde, calling en route at Moultrie Station, then under the management of my life-long friend, Mr Robert Turnbull. After luncheon with Mr Turnbull, I rode on to Clyde, arriving on Saturday evening. I spent Sunday in Clyde, preached morning and evening, and examined the Sunday school in the afternoon.
On the Monday morning I left Clyde at 6 a.m. by coach for Queenstown, and after breakfast at Cromwell, had just time to look a,t the church then in course of erection on the Terrace, and arrived in Queenstown at 5 o’clock. On the Tuesday I made arrangements for the consecration of church cemeteries at Queenstown, Arrowtown and Skippers, and at 4.30 in the afternoon rode to the Arrow to meet the church committee there. There was a long discussion on the question of separation from Queenstown, the committee urging me to consent to the formation of a new charge to include Macetown and Cardrona. The committee declared itself willing to pledge itself to find a stipend of £lBO, and probably £2OO per annum. But seeing that the sum paid towards the stipend of the vicar at Queenstown was only £6O per annum, and knowing that the mining industry at Macetown and Cardrona was on the wane, I held out no hope of meeting their wishes at that time, especially as there was no residence for a clergyman. I rode back to Queenstown at the close of the meeting, reaching there at 12! 15, the night being fine.
69
Early Diocesan Work
On Thursday, November 19, Mr Smith and I rode to Skippers, at that time a difficult and even dangerous journey, some 18 miles of which was a mere track on the top of high mountains. In many places one could drop a stone from one’s seat in the saddle down a sheer fall of hundreds of feet; in other places we had to descend to the bed of the Shotover River, which ran in a deep gorge below. We had to dismount and lead our horses down steps roughly cut in the rocks. We were hospitably received by a Mr Bordeaux, a French Canadian, who held these mountains as a sheep run. Mr Bordeaux was a member of the Latin Church, but he attended the service which was held in the library of Skippers, and he presented the infant child of his manager, an Italian, Philipino by name, for holy baptism, although Philipino himself was a Romanist. Mr Bordeaux provided me with a lodging for the night, and, of course, the supper and breakfast required. His great kindness was also displayed in pressing upon me the loan of his horse for the return to Queenstown the following morning, all concurring in the opinion that I ought not to be allowed to risk my life on the dangerous animal I had hired from the livery stables in Queenstown. Mr Roskeuge, manager of the Phoenix Mine, kindly volunteered to lead back the nervous creature, which, in his mad fright at a bird or a shadow, had more than once nearly shied over the narrow track cut in the side of the hills. Before starting I consecrated the church portion of the public cemetery at Skippers, as on the following day I did the same at Queenstown.
I break off the account of this visitation of the north-western part of the Diocese to make a confession of how very far I was on a long subsequent occasion from making a courteous return for these great kindnesses shown to me by Mr Bordeaux. Mr Hampton, then vicar of Queenstown, having prepared a candidate for confirmation at Skippers, I accompanied him thither to perform the rite. By this time a road had been formed much lower down the hill, and, being wider, was much safer than the old one, which had in it only a few recesses cut in the hillside by which a traveller from the opposite direction could pass. Arriving at Mr Bordeaux’s, he asked us to stay with him after the evening service. Mr Hampton, however, said he was very desirous of reaching home that night, and if it was light enough he said we would go back. After the service we took tea with some friends near the school, and as it was moonlight decided to return to Queenstown, something over 20 miles. Mr Bordeaux heard us as we were passing his house, and rushing out, he begged us to stay. I should like to have done so, but as Mr Hampton went off at a gallop, I excused myself to Mr Bordeaux, and followed, only to hear the good man crying after us; “And I have keeled my leetle peeg!”
Returning to my account of this first trip to Skippers, I may add that we stopped on our way back to Queenstown at the house of Mr Goodwin, of “Maori Point,” according to a promise made as we ascended the Shotover Gorge. Here we had lunch, and as a Bishop was then such a rara avis, Mr Goodwin had gathered his neighbours, miners who were working the river bank for gold, and so I held a
70
Early Diocesan Work
short service, with an address. As I record this incident I am led to wonder whether the men of this generation are equally ready to welcome a religious service in the afternoon as the men of the old time were? Or is it that we clergy, in this hurrying age of express trains between distant points, have no opportunity of inviting them?
The next day, Saturday, I consecrated the church portion of the Queenstown cemetery, the Mayor reading the petition; and on the next day preached in the morning service at Arrowtown, consecrated the cemetery in the afternoon —the District Warden reading the petition to the Bishop,—and held a service for confirmation at Queenstown in the evening, at which ten male and nine female candidates were presented. On the Monday evening I held a meeting of the vestry, and left Queenstown by coach on the Tuesday morning. I did not, however, return home by this coach, but turned northwards again on reaching Cromwell. Mr Fergus, late of Dunedin, then a resident in Cromwell, kindly lent me his horse, and I rode the same evening as far as Mount Pisa Station, then managed by Mr Luffnan, a member of a well-known Roman Catholic family. With him and a Mr Wilmot, of the Anglican communion, I spent a very pleasant evening, and left on the following day for Lake Wanaka, where I was very hospitably received by Mr Henry Campbell, the proprietor; the station homestead being at that time a little to the east of the township of Pembroke, instead of being, as now, at the foot of Lake Wanaka on the west. Mr Campbell said that if I would stay over a second night he would arrange his woolshed so that I could hold a service in it, as he had a large number of shearers at work, and as they had then neither resident nor visiting minister of religion of an)' denomination, they would be glad if I could do so. I need not say that I gladly fell in with his wishes, and spent the intermediate time in a survey of the truly magnificent scenery of the district, climbing Mount Iron for the purpose, and thence obtaining a view of part of Lake Hawea as well as Lake Wanaka, with the snow-capped mountains enclosing each, as well as the river Molyneux as it issued, clear and bright, from the latter lake, though fed by both, and therefore at its debouchment a full and wide stream. As I had brought with me, m accordance with my usual habit, a small sketch block and paint box, I was delighted to make use of the opportunity and the glorious weather to make a few sketches, thanking God that as He had given me some natural love of art, he had also sent me to a country of which the natural beauty was so pre-eminent. I may mention that my effort to make a sketch from the top of Mount Iron was somewhat roughly interrupted by a flock of keas not only revolving continuously round my head, but one or more of these ferocious but beautiful falcons or parrots, or whatever they are, would dash almost into my face and cause me some alarm for my eyes.
I will briefly describe the service which I held in Mr Campbell’s woolshed, because it will suffice as an example of the many such which I held both before and after this time, services which I always greatly enjoyed, not so much, I think, from the novelty of the
Early Diocesan Work
71
situation as from the heartiness and apparent sincerity of the men who were engaged in them. I much regret that the totally altered circumstances of to-day have brought about the disuse of such gatherings, I fear that the multiplication of clergy and churches may lead to some neglect of the “ highways and hedges ” from which there are still so many to be gathered in.
At the time fixed for the service, then, the men had rolled the bales of wool along the sides of the woolshed and across the middle so as to leave an open space in which impromtu seats of all kinds were arranged. A bale lying on its side formed my pulpit and the prayer desk, while many of the men would prefer to sit or lie upon other bales at the sides or back. On this occasion, as on many others, I had made inquiries as to who could sing and what sort of hymn books they had. Why is it that men of the shearer class prefer a Moody and Sankey hymn to those of a more refined type? I used generally to find that I could get a small choir together for singing such hymns, but otherwise had to fall back upon “ All people that on earth do dwell” and “Abide with Me.” However, I always gave out verse by verse, and having a strong voice, I was usually able to carry through some of the best-known hymns. My addresses were always listened to with a very earnest attention, though I never descended to any jocular or even anecdotal style, as appears to be sometimes thought necessary to secure the attention of such an audience. The only kind of interruption I ever experienced was when some of the numerous dogs, which usually came with their masters, began to disagree, and then it often happened that the well-intentioned kick which they would receive from some member of my audience to stop the fighting resulted in a greater noise than ever.
Leaving Wanaka, I crossed the river at Albert Town, or Newcastle—names which have not survived —in a punt, in order to call at Ardgour and Garricks passing along the eastern bank of the Molyneux, and reached Cromwell at 6.30, and returned his horse to Mr Fergus.
Sunday, November 29, being St. Andrew’s Day, and the church being now ready for opening, I formally dedicated it under the name of that Apostle, and founded my address upon St. Andrew’s bringing his brother Peter to Christ. Quite a number of persons had come over from Clyde, and I accompanied Mr Stevens back to that place in the afternoon with a view to preaching there at evensong. Just before going into church a letter was delivered to me which contained news of the death of my wife’s sister, a young woman who had stayed much with us at Shelton Rectory, and who had married one of my former curates. Knowing how deeply Mrs Nevill would feel her loss 1 rose at 4 o’clock on the following morning and took coach via Naseby, the Dunedin coach, via Lawrence, not going until Tuesday. I thus reached home on the Tuesday evening, December 1.
This tour of the western part of the Diocese had thus occupied exactly a month from the time of my leaving home. It will easily be seen that in trips which took up so much time the difficulty of getting
6;
Early Diocesan Work
changes of linen was not small. My plan was to send on my portmanteau by coach to some town I was shortly to visit, and to make “a swag” of a small supply of clothing and my ecclesiastical vestments, if needed, and strap these in front of my saddle.
On Thursday, December 3, 1874, I opened the church of St. Matthew, Dunedin; the foundation stone of which had been laid on July 11, 1873. The Rev. Edward Gorton Penny, M.A., was the first incumbent.
From December 30, 1874, until March, 1875, I had unfortunately to be away from home in attendance at the death bed of my dear brother, the Rev. E. B. Nevill, who had been obliged to resign his charge of Christchurch Wanganui on account of ill-health, and whom I had brought down to Akaroa, taking his three remaining children to our Dunedin home.
I possess several volumes of the journals which I wrote from day to day for many years, snatching intervals between my official engagements to enter particulars of arrangements made with parish vestries and individuals, and these I have found very useful for subsequent reference, especially as it was my custom in those days, when travelling was both so difficult and so expensive, to act the part of Archdeacon as well as Bishop. I summoned vestries and church committees to meet me, and with them inspected all church buildings and drew attention to needed repairs. These I usually found had been attended to on my next visit. I also entered into my book the full names of all persons confirmed at every place, and carrying my book with me, it was an easy thing, as well as a pleasure, to visit at their own homes, when time allowed, those whom I had confirmed perhaps a year before. These details, of course, constituted a large part of my life, since the visitation of the Diocese involved absences from home for about nine months in each year; but as such details are of little general interest I will satisfy myself with one more extract from my diary which gives an account of a tour of the southern and western parts of the Diocese in the year 1875, before the construction of railways so entirely altered the character of my work, and indeed the plans on which it was conducted.
On Friday, April g, of the above-mentioned year I started by Cobb’s coach from Manse Street, Dunedin, at 7 a.m. en route to Invercargill, which was reached about 6 o’clock on the Saturday evening. During the time of the coach’s stay in Balclutha, I found time to glance at the work of church building then going on under a sketch plan which I had supplied, and which was subsequently used also for the church at Clinton. On Sunday, the nth, I preached at the harvest festival service in the old St. John’s, a shapeless wooden church without chancel, and held a service for confirmation therein in the evening. I spent the week in Invercargill, as I was very anxious to create a better feeling in that place than had previously existed. There was no sentiment of Diocesan unity; one Session of Diocesan Synod passed without either parish priest or lay representative being present thereat, nor had lay representatives even been appointed.
73
Early Diocesan Work
A former visit to the parish had been made unhappy by my having been invited to attend a public meeting of church people, in which a demand was made upon me quite unexpectedly to constitute a Rural Deanery Board for Invercargill and its neighbourhood. I had on that occasion declined to use the powers, which it was alleged that the Act of the General Synod conferred upon me, arguing that what we wanted was unity, not separation; but I also said that if at a meeting of the Diocesan Synod at which properly appointed representatives of the district were present such a Board was constituted, and its powers and functions properly defined, I would not oppose the erection of such a Board. The intervening Diocesan Synod left the matter in my hands, and on the occasion of this visit I was prepared to submit a scheme which I had prepared for the purpose. On Wednesday, April 14, after Divine service, I addressed a meeting at which I explained the functions which the Board might perform and the powers granted to it and the Rural Dean. These were, of course, subordinate to the Synod, and intended to be for the development of the church work by the holding of meetings for inquiry and obtaining information. My scheme was well received; it was largely founded upon my experience of my English Rural Deanery. Strange to say, however, from the time of my launching of the scheme I heard no more about it. No report was ever sent to me or to the Synod of meetings held under its auspices if any such were held, nor were my hopes fulfilled that such a Board would be instrumental in the establishment of additional Cures.
I find it noted in my diary that on this occasion I received many more tokens of cordial regard as Bishop than formerly, and that on Saturday, the 17th, I proceeded on my way to Riverton with a happy heart.
On the Sunday I was able in my morning address to congratulate the parishioners on the enlargement of the little church by the erection of a chancel and the seating of the choir therein, and in the evening I confirmed eight male and nine female candidates. I had occupied the afternoon first by a visit to the parish Sunday school, and afterwards by holding a short service for the Maoris in the little chapel there, still in existence in the Native reserve. This was the building in which old Solomon, who had been appointed by Bishop Selwyn to conduct services, had ever since that time kept up the reading of morning prayer, or some part of it. There were still many prayer books in the seats, though for the most part so dilapidated that the congregation, some 20 Natives, had a difficulty in following the service, which was read in Maori by Mr Oldham,
On the Tuesday evening a soiree was held at which a presentation was made to Miss Daniel, who had for a long time arranged the musical part of Divine service and played the harmonium. She was one of the daughters of a strange old man who described himself as the last survivor of a band of religionists called Christian Israelites, and the remaining trustee for a strip of land lying alongside of our church property. He told me that as the society was now defunct he
Early Diocesan Work
74
would bequeath this land to the church. As things turned out, however, the old man afterwards accepted a sum of money which was offered him by the Presbyterians and conveyed the land to them.
On the Wednesday, having succeeded in hiring a horse, Mr Oldham and I started about 12 o’clock on the first stage of a journey intended to embrace the Waiau and Te Anau country. We called at the house of Dr Hodgkinson, a gentleman of strongly marked political and puritanical opinions. The present railway station and small township of Fairfax owes its name to his great admiration of Cromwell and his associates. After a short time spent in making the acquaintance of his family of daughters, we made our way through the break in the range known as Scott’s Gap, though we lost some time by missing the track, and arrived at Merrivale Station just as night was falling. We were hospitably received by Captain Ellis, and spent the night there. Captain Ellis had valuable property in Australia, but he talked of settling in Merrivale, and I did my best to enlist his support for the church, both by subscribing to the Riverton Cure and by aiding the church people in Otautau to establish a church in that new township. Finding that the proprietor of Mount Linton Station was away from home, we went round by the small settlement known as Eastern Bush, and took lunch with a Mr and Mrs Green of that place, who very kindly entertained us. Mrs Green told me of a young Maor l woman, a daughter of old Solomon, who was dying of consumption, and I went to see her. I was very thankful that I was able to do so, for I found her anxious for the ministrations of a priest and a very intelligent person. I was not a little surprised by her knowledge of the truths of the Christian religion, and she opened her mind to me with entire frankness and much humility, and her gratitude when I took my departure was touching by its evident sincerity. I found Eastern Bush to be the home of several full-blood and half-caste Maori families.
At Mr Green’s I found Miss Tuson, the daughter of Mr Tuson, of “ Gummies Bush,” who was himself the brother of an English clergyman, and my lay reader there. Miss Tuson was acting as governess to the children of the family. I think the story I received of her accomplishments of the few days before my arrival is worthy of record as an illustration of energy and powers of endurance on the part of a colonial young lady. On the Monday evening she had attended a social gathering held some miles distant from Eastern Bush. Dancing had been kept up all night, and the following day had been spent in riding round the neighbourhood, reaching home late in the evening. She there received tidings of the illness of her father at Gummies Bush, nearly 40 miles off. Taking horse again immediately she rode through the night, and happily found her father as suddenl}' recovered as he had been taken ill. This being so, Miss Tuson decided to take the opportunity of going into Riverton, about seven miles off, to do some shopping, and from thence she rode back the whole distance to Eastern Bush the same night, and had just risen from bed at the time of our arrival, looking perfectly fit and well.
;o
Early Diocesan Work
Mr Oldham and I rode on to a station occupied by a Captain and Mrs Brown, whom we fortunately found at home, and spent a very pleasant evening in their company. Mrs Brown was a sister of Dean Garden, Their sons were away at a new property they had taken up on the other side of the noble river Waiau.
On the following morning we went on to another station then belonging to Captain Brown—viz., Blackmount, —which was under the management of Mr Barnhills. The acquaintance I then made with Mr Barnhills ripened into a sincere friendship which I enjoyed for very many years; a friendship which was not lessened by the fact that he was a Presbyterian, since he was a manly and sincerely religious man. In later times I visited him at the Von Station and Mount Nicholas on Lake Wakatipu, and on many occasions at Castle Rock, the station near Lumsden which he occupied so long. Here at Blackmount, as on all other visits to his home, I was asked to conduct evening prayers for the family and servants. At this time there were present Mrs Adamson, a sister of Barnhills, and a cadet who was learning the business of sheep farming. In those days there were many scions of good English and Scottish families similarly engaged upon the larger stations then existing. I was greatly charmed with the beauty of the garden and grounds at the back of Blackmount. The banks of a nice stream which ran past the station were made very picturesque by the fine specimens of the cedar-like birch trees which abound in the western parts of Southland, and of which there are several varieties.
Mr Barnhills told off the cadet to accompany us some part of the way to Mr Duncan’s station of Excelsior Peak; itself one of the outliers of the great Takatimo Range, a grand mass of mountains which, usually snow-capped, lend such a glory to the Southland scenery. We lunched with Mr Duncan, who afterwards took me up a shoulder of the mountain from which we obtained a very beautiful though distant view of Lake Manipouri. After this we pursued our way towards Linwood, the property of the Hankinson brothers, who were members of a well-known Yorkshire family. We crossed the river Macarora without much difficulty, though this is often a rather formidable undertaking, and afterwards some smaller streams, but we must have missed the proper track, as we found no proper road to the station. After a good many hours of riding, as it was getting dark and we thought we might be benighted, I asked Mr Oldham to hold my horse, and pushed my way through some scrub to the bare hill-top at the head of the gully in which we were, and from thence I discovered a light shining through the bush on the opposite side of the valley beneath me, and descending to Mr Oldham we made our way round, and reaching the station found Mr and Mrs Donald Hankinson at dinner. We had sent them notice of our intended visit, but after waiting for some time they had at length given us up. I found Mr D. Hankinson a charming and well-read man, and his wife, though very delicate, a gifted musician of a highly poetic and artistic temperament. I was greatly touched by the devotedness of this refined couple to each other, and particularly for the tenderness with
Early Diocesan Work.
76
which the husband aided his wife to discharge the functions of a hostess, in spite of the shyness which had grown upon her as a consequence of her lengthened seclusion from society. I may say, in passing, that this was not the only instance in which similar conditions of isolation had produced a like effect upon the lady of the house. The men could mix with their fellows and go from time to time to market towns on business, but the women too often remained not only without society, but almost without companionship in those early days. I was the more easily able to draw forth the interest of Mrs Hankinson, who was a member of the Worsley family, from my acquaintance with the Rev. Dr Worsley, Master of Downing College, Cambridge, who was himself a brother of Sir Joseyh Worsley, her father.
We stayed at Linwood over the Sunday, and had quite a good gathering for a morning service held in the dining-room. Mr Duncan had ridden over on the Saturday to remain for a few days, and Mr Ferguson, of Barwood Station, was also present, as well as Mr Hankinson’s manager and servants, and we held a similar service in the evening with a good many hymns. On each occasion I made a short and simple address.
On the Monday I was delighted to find that Mrs Hankinson felt well enough to fall in with her husband’s plan of making a tour of the district, spending the whole day out. The party consisted of Mr and Mrs Hankinson, Mr Duncan and myself; Mr Oldham preferring to remain at the station. We crossed the Upokuroa River and made our way to the Te Anau Lake. Captain Hankinson and another brother of Mr Donald were away exploring one of the long arms of the opposite side of Te Anau. We turned southwards, and, riding down the Whitestone River Valley, stopped for a picnic lunch at the point where the Waiau River debouches, broad and clear and beautiful, from the foot of the Te Anau. We afterwards followed the course of this river for some miles until we reached a point at which we obtained a good view of the Manipouri Lake, the Waiau thus connecting the two; thence returning to Linwood. I found our holiday trip had meant a round of about 30 miles, but the perfect weather, combined with the glorious scenery, had quite precluded any thought of weariness, and I think we were all of us the better for our trip.
The next day we bade farewell to our kind friends to fulfil a promise I had made to Mr Fergusson, that I would visit Barewood, a sheep station which he managed for Robert Campbell and Co., our route having been described to us. A few miles east of Linwood we rode through a remarkable patch of veronicas, consisting of several varieties, some of which I had not seen before. We did not reach Centre Hill Station (Thornhills) until evening was coming on, as the road at the foot of Mount Hamilton was very difficult to travel over, water oozing from the hillside resulted in the formation of what are called crab holes, into which a horse stepping may easily break his leg. In one place a marsh had to be negotiated, the water in which
72
was almost deep enough to be called a lake. Mr Oldham’s horse got bogged, and would not move, though Mr Oldham got off and tried to pull him out by the reins. The brute eventually lay down in the water, and I was half afraid he would be drowned. After fruitless efforts made for a long time, in which neither coaxing nor kicks were of any avail, I said, “ Let us leave him and see what he will do!” So we went with my horse round a point of rock at no great distance and watched him from thence. Before long the wily creature raised his head, and seeing no one, scrambled to his feet and proceeded to nibble at the tussock. I went up to him quietly on my horse and caught him by the bridle and brought him without difficulty to Mr Oldham. I suppose he had got over his sulky temper! We reached Centre Hill without further trouble, and after some rest and refreshment the two brothers Thornhill decided to accompany us to Barewood, which was only some four miles further on. I found preparation had been made for a service in the drawing-room of the house, and as men and women servants had been invited, and the Thorntons accepted an invitation for the night, we had quite a good gathering. On the following morning Mr Ferguson requested me to baptise his infant son, though he was himself a Presbyterian. I showed him the rule at the end of the prayer book service and explained the purport of the service generally. He told me that they never received a visit from a minister of their own denomination, and eventually I consented to baptise the child privately.
We accompanied the Thornhills back to Centre Hill, and one of them afterwards piloted us a good way on towards Mr Bastian’s station, called Dunrobin, but to be distinguished from a hamlet of that name in Central Otago. We were glad of the escort, as there was no distinct track and a good many streams to cross as we entered the Aparima Valley. Mr Christopher Bastian and his daughter (afterwards Mrs Keach) were away from home, but the servant roasted a fowl for us and made us very comfortable for the night. In the morning, finding Miss Bastian’s album upon the table, I made bold to write a few rhyming lines in it expressive of our regret at not finding her at home, and then set forth on a return journey of 52 miles to Riverton, which we reached in the evening. I returned my horse to its owner and paid for the use of it.
From Mrs Keach, 137 York Place, Dunedin
We came to a home at eventide
To a home at the foot of the hill
And we hoped for a greeting to pay for our ride.
But all was dark and still.
It was not the stillness of peace was there.
But the stillness of absence and gloom;
No pressure of hand or lighting of face
u Jjjtaauxc ui uauu ux ui IrtLt; As we entered the empty room.
Early Diocesan Work.
Early Diocesan Work
78
Yet the servants well knew what their master would do,
And they faithfully acted their part;
The quick-ready meal and the cheery fire
Expressed what they knew' w'ould be their desire.
So Bishop and Priest and their friendly guide,
• ■-• • - * “001 01™ uivu iiituuiy guiut After sweet repose on pillows of down,
Resumed in the morn their weary ridi
The one to his home, the others to town
And the mistletoe shrivelled within the door
As we left our Peace —we could leave no mor
April 29, 1875, Duncdinensis.
The Rev. F. Oldham, Riverton, is the Priest mentioned, and Mr George Thornhill, of Centre Hill Station, was the guide.
On Saturday, April 30, I had to start for Orepuki, nothwithstanding a violent south-west gale, since we were expected there on the Sunday. The distance was 25 miles, but as Mr Oldham could not get away before noon, we only proposed to reach Kaiwakapatu that night, and to proceed early in the morning, notwithstanding that we had to walk all the way. This turned out to be one of the most trying expeditions I had experienced. As the heavy rain gave no sign of abating, I bought in Riverton what was said to be a waterproof overcoat, not a mackintosh, but of heavier material. To make matters worse, my good friend, Mr Oldham, was very short sighted, and, moreover, had not the bump of locality, and soon after our entry of the bush which had to be crossed before reaching Colacs Bay (named after the old chief Koraka), we found we had followed a track which ended in a cul de sac, and had to retrace our steps. Our second attempt was more fortunate, as we carefully avoided mere cattle tracks; but by the time we reached the Maori kaik of Kaiwakapatu it was getting dark. We were very kindly received by Mrs Cameron, a half-caste who had married Mr Cameron, a member of the Roman Communion. He himself was away, but there was a large family of children, and a man who was a miner had also taken refuge at this house. We were soon comforted by a warm fire and a meal of coffee and fried bacon, and our presence did not interrupt either the Saturday night ceremony of tubbing the children or the saying of their prayers. Girls of about 16 performed their ablutions modestly wearing their petticoats, after which they said their prayers and repeated the Apostles’ Creed. Several full-blood Natives came into the whare in tne course of the evening.
Mr Oldham and I shared a bed on the floor in an outbuilding. Mr Oldham, being very tired, fell asleep at once, but sleep on my part was rendered impossible by the ceaseless attentions of insects known as F. sharps, of which the numbers seemed countless. We started early as we had to make our way for about six miles through the Pahi swamp, rendered almost impassable by the continuous rain.
74
Early Diocesan Work
Several times we had to cut flax and gather manuka sticks to make it possible to cross the swollen streams, and my so-called mackintosh soon became almost insupportably heavy by taking in and retaining many pounds weight of water. Reaching at length the wooded hills beyond which Orepuki lay, I felt so done up that I sat on a fallen tree, while Mr Oldham pushed on to the residence of Mr Hirst, and as after a while I followed him I was met by Mr Hirst on horseback, who was leading another horse for me. After a mouthful of refreshment we all rode on to the small township of Orepuki, then a mining village. In spite of bad weather we had a good attendance, and I stayed all day, in the course of which I held a meeting of church people and formed a committee of nine persons, with Mr Hirst as church officer. I also baptised a number of children, and held another service in the evening. Mr Hirst thought it would be better to ride back by the beach, though at this time it was quite dark, and as the tide was in there was but little room between the sea and the rocks—added to this we were caught in a terrible squall of wind and hail. In some places the waves passed under my horse, and the flying foam added to the keen hail dashing into my face, I had to trust entirely to my horse as I could see nothing, and the sudden swerve which the maddened creature made through the opening in the cliffs which led to the farm nearly unseated me by being unexpected. Before long, however, we were all gathered in the shelter —I had almost said of Mr Hirst’s hospitable roof, —but of that more anon.
Mr Hirst had married a Native, and had a family of growing children, and I greatly enjoyed an hour’s chat in the warm kitchen, especially as Mr Hirst was full of humour and good stories. As to the latter I am afraid that I rather stimulated his inventive faculty byasking if he knew anything about what old Solomon had called those “fire-eating Maoris of the West Coast? One such story was a Robinson Crusoe one about the track of a man’s footsteps he professed to have seen leading from the bush across the sand to the sea, the space between each footstep being far greater than the stride of an ordinary man. On my solemnly remarking that “ perhaps it was a whale,” he looked at me doubtfully, but he afterwards told his friends that he had pulled mj' leg beautifully. Now for “the hospitable roof.” I fell asleep the moment after I was in bed, but awoke in the night very cold, and found my beard and moustache covered with ice. Opening my eyes I saw bright stars shining above me which made me wonder where I was. Could I possibly have got out of the house! Finding that I was in bed there was nothing for it but to huddle my clothes about me and go to sleep again. Receiving in the morning the customary hope that I had passed a good night, addressed to me somewhat quizzically by Mr Hirst, I replied that it was a beautiful bedroom, and that I especially admired the star-spangled ceiling. This led to a burst of laughter, and afterwards to the explanation that in preparation for my expected visit they had determined to substitute a new corrugated iron roof for the old shingle one, which was so decayed as to let in the rain. The sheets of iron had not been
Early Diocesan Work
80
delivered, but as the storm seemed to have cleared off, the good people had made up the bed in their best room, and hoped that, with an extra blanket, I should be all right. Mr Hirst made up for any deficiences there might have been in the night by lending us two fine horses for our homeward journey, which we were to leave at the sawmill near to Riverton till he could get them back.
On the following day, May 4, 1875, I left Riverton with a view to completing my visitation of the west and southern districts by an exploration of the Mataura River Valley from Wyndham to Fortrose, which was at the time entirely destitute of any church organisation. Descending from the Invercargill coach at Edendale, a conveyance carried me to Wyndham, where I hired a horse and proceeded the same evening as far as the Oaklands Station, belonging to Dr Richardson, of Dunedin, and managed by his married son. I had called on my way at the house of Mr Douglas, of Glenham, from whom and his wife I received a very hearty welcome. Mr Richardson was not at home, and in the morning I pursued my way, after promising Mrs Richardson that I would call again on my way back in order to baptise the infant son and also the son of Mr Malcolm Richardson, who occupied a neighbouring farm. It was this Dr Richardson who had done so much in raising funds for the building of St. Paul’s, the first Anglican Church in Dunedin. He also gave 10 acres of his land on the Oaklands estate. His youngest son, James, was long known in Dunedin and other places as a willing helper in Church music. I mayadd that it was not very long after this time that I was called upon to attend Dr Richardson in his last illness, and he had much to tell me of the social history' of the earliest settlers.
My ride from Oaklands was as far as the station known as Bruntons,” a little beyond Fortrose, and I was warmly received by them. Mr Brunton promised to secure a site for a church in the township of Fortrose and to aid me in securing the ministrations ol the Church in that district, though he was related to the Mr Brunton who had founded a sect long known in Dunedin and Invercargill as the Bruntonites, akin to Plymouth Brethren.
After calling upon all the people I could reach, I returned to the Richardsons for the night. On the following day, after baptising the children, I rode on to Edendale and caught the coach there, sending back my hired horse to Wyndham by the bus driver.
The coach at that time stayed at the newly-established Clinton Hotel instead of at Popotunoa Gorge as before, and as the railway works were now in progress the hotel was crowded with navvies, and I shared a small room with Mr McCaughan, afterwards well known in Invercargill and on the Waimea Plains. Mr McCaughan, although a Romanist, offered me £2O per annum towards the stipend of an Anglican priest for the whole Mataura River Valley. The Rev. John Hobbs was the first clergyman I could put in charge, and he, living
81
Early Diocesan Work
at Gore, worked the whole country from Lumsden—then called the Elbow—down to Fortrose inclusive. I reached my home on Saturday evening, May 8, this visitation of the south and west having occupied just one month of uninterrupted work and a travel of over 600 miles.
During the following two years the ordinary work of a Bishop was carried on with nothing more remarkable than the opening of new churches, ordination of clergy, and similar marks of progress, which are recorded in the reports of the Diocesan Synod.
In the year 1876 I accompanied the then Governor of New Zealand, Sir James Ferguson, Bart., on a trip to the West Coast Sounds in his private yacht, the “Lady Blanche,” and, meeting with boisterous weather, had some narrow escapes. At the entrance to Preservation Inlet we were so nearly driven on to a reef that Dr Hector, Captain Fergusson and myself got into the small boat and pulled with our all our might to keep her off, and we only succeeded because the wind slightly changed. On our return journey we were carried as far as Akaroa Harbour before we were able to land.
As the year 1878 approached the Standing Committee and leading officers of the Diocese became more and more troubled about the nonfulfilment of the arrangements made with me with reference to Bishopscourt and the endowment of the Diocese. No effort had been made either to repurchase the house from me, or even to pay the sum agreed upon by way of house rent in the meantime, nor was there anything considerable accomplished by way of raising an endowment for the See. These questions became the cause of much unpleasant discussion in Synod, as well as injurious recrimination outside. Laymen charged the clergy with apathy and want of leadership in the matter, and at length it was said that I had saddled the Diocese with a white elephant, and I was asked to relieve the Diocese of its obligations and to assume entire possession and full rights over the house I had built and the 25 acres I had acquired. The Diocese then, after forgiving itself the debt owing to me, entered upon a new arrangement pledging itself afresh in these matters, and I need only add that the new pledge remained like the old one, a dead letter.
LAMBETH CONFERENCE OF 1878.
Early in the year 1878, as I had received the invitation to attend the second meeting of the Lambeth Conference, I determined to visit England both for that purpose and also with the object of giving an English education to the four children whom I had practically adopted. And as it was now evident that the purposes for which I had acquired the property and built the large house known as Bishopscourt would not be carried into effect by the Diocese, I took the opportunity of disposing of the whole. I had no sooner done this than people began to realise how great a mistake had been made by the Diocese in not having secured, by the fulfilment of the terms agreed upon in 1871, a property which was sure to become before long a valuable endowment for the Bishopric. Rumours were afloat that I had made a large profit by this sale. This was by no means the case; but as I could not endure the insinuated charges, I made another offer to certain gentlemen of the Diocese, whom I called together for the purpose, which was, that if they would purchase and hold as trustees for the Diocese a stipulated area of the property adjoining the city, and known as Littlebourne, I would myself build a See House thereupon on plans to be approved, and close all future troubles of this distressful kind by giving it to the Diocese. The gentlemen referred to accepted my suggestion and secured the property, but as the Diocese did not fall in with the scheme, they eventually purchased the land for themselves, and sold it in sections for building upon. It is, perhaps, needless to say that I decided to make no more offers to the Diocese; but there was no See House for me to occupy on my return from England.
After lodging my library and furniture in a Dunedin warehouse, we left Port Chalmers in a sailing vessel, the “ Otaki,” on February :6, in which, after being becalmed off the Horn for some days in sight of miles of icebergs, and then encountering one of the heaviest storms I ever was in off the Falkland Islands, we arrived in England in May. Bishop Selwyn had very kindly invited me to stay with him at the Palace, Lichfield; but the first newspaper which I procured on the arrival of the ship in London contained an announcement of the death of the Bishop himself. I naturally received this news with great regret, as being the loss of a great Bishop of the Church and a personal friend; but there was a point of view from which I could hardly regard it as other than Providential. It was a matter of general knowledge that Bishop Selwyn had set his mind upon promoting some action of the Lambeth Conference, by which the Archbishop might come to be recognised as the Patriarch of the Anglican Communion, and so to become possessed of some kind of authority over the whole. Some such idea may even have been in his mind when, in his farewell address to the General Synod of New Zealand ten years before, he had used
83
Lambeth Conference
these words: “To maintain the intimate union between the Mother Church and her Colonial Branches will be one of the chief objects of my future life.” It was no secret that it was in pursuance of this object that the Bishop had visited America a short time before the conference, as it was natural to expect that it was from the American Bishops that his scheme was likely to meet with the most serious opposition. I had the greatest reverence as well as affection for Bishop Selwyn, but it had been with some feeling of trepidation that I had looked forward to staying with him as I had been invited to do, since I felt that I must oppose a project which I held to be .contrary to Catholic principles, and calculated to interfere with the liberty of ecclesiastical provinces.
I had been led to a study of these questions from the fact that Bishop Grey, Metropolitan of South Africa, had been my guest at Shelton Rectory during the Colenso controversy, and we had discussed very freely the subject of Provincial autonomy, subject, of course, to the maintenance of the faith, which if controvened in one province might involve reference to neighbouring ones, or even to a General Council.
The formal inauguration of this second Lambeth Conference took place on St. Peter’s Day, Saturday, June 29, by a gathering of the Bishops at Canterbury. A morning service was held in the College Chapel of St. Augustus College, a few minutes before which I met Archbishop Tait in the grounds of the College. He extended to me both his hands, and his words of welcome appeared designed to express his fullest recognition of my position. At the special evensong in the Cathedral the Archbishop was seated in the marble chair, known as St. Augustus Chair, which had been placed in the centre above the altar steps. The Bishops had seats provided upon the steps themselves, and my seat happened to be near the top.
It is impossible for me adequately to describe the emotions I experienced from the moment of entering the glorious cathedral which, from its situation, makes it so representative of the restoration of Christianity to England by the mission of Augustine to the Angles and Saxons of the close of the sixth century. At the opening of the first Lambeth Conference in 1867 I had preached in my parish church of Shelton, hailing that event as the most prophetically momentous of modern times; but little did I think then that in the Providence of God I should myself be called upon to take my seat some ten years later as a member of the second of such a council of Apostles from the uttermost parts of the world. Looking down the vista of the crowded cathedral from the altar steps upon the intent faces of Bishops, clergy and people, one was moved b}’ something more than mere animal magnetism. Was the very atmosphere charged with angels? Was not He present who had said, “ Where two or three are met together there am lin the midst of you”? I suppose that the most of us carried that impression with us more or less strongly into the deliberations of the Sessions which followed.
Lambeth Conferenci
84
The plan followed at this and subsequent meetings of the Lambeth Conference was for each of the subjects set down for consideration to be discussed at the first series of Sessions, and a committee appointed at the close of such discussion, which should meet during a short recess and draw up a report to be presented at a further Session, which report should be founded upon this preliminary discussion, and embrace the recommendations of the committee upon the particular subject for the further consideration of the conference, prior to any decision or pronouncement upon it.
The first question to be submitted to the assembled Bishops in 1878 was “To consider the best mode of maintaining unity of doctrine and discipline amongst the various churches of the Anglican Communion.” It was well understood that it was under this heading that the notion of the creation of a Patriarchate of the Anglican Communion would be brought forward, and the leading Church papers had been rather full of the subject, both in leading articles and in the letters of correspondents. It was also generally known that the visit of Bishop Selwyn to the Bishops in America, a short time before, had been made with reference to this question, as it was to be expected that opposition to such a proposal would spring from that quarter. The discussion of the subject above mentioned had not proceeded far before the suggestion of the Patriarchate of Canterbury was brought forward, and, if I rightly remember, it was by Dr Woodford, then Bishop of Oxford. He himself was strongly in favour of such a scheme as a security to the Church against false doctrine, which he somewhat disparagingly affirmed might at any time arise among the less learned clergy and church people of the colonies —glancing as he did so at the troubles in the Church of South Africa. The proposal, however, found but little support. The American Bishops were entirely silent, and as there were few speakers, the President turned to those about him. The Archbishop of York, Dr Thompson, shook his head, as did also Bishop Harold Browne, and although the Bishop of Durham, Dr Lightfoot, made a few remarks, he was far from being enthusiastic in the matter. To my surprise, however, he quoted the rhetorical compliment paid by Pope Urban to Archbishop Anselm, when that Prelate look refuge with the Pope in his controversy with the King. In this official reception the Pope had hailed his champion as “ Alterius orbis Papa,” the Pope of another world. I felt moved to rise in defence of the Church in the colonies, and said that as most of our questions were of a practical rather than of a theological character, I thought there was probably even less danger of our departing from the faith than among our brethren at Home, and that with regard to the Colenso trouble, which had been alluded to, it did not arise from colonial ignorance, nor did I think that any advantage had been gained by carrying the matter beyond the decision of the Metropolitan of South Africa. I also ventured to say to the Bishop of Durham that I thought he had not been happy in his quotation, since the Pope’s allusion had manifestly been to the distance between England and Rome, so that if the words were to apply to the subject before us, they would
Lambeth Conference.
85
appear to point to the independent authority of a Bishop in the Antipodes. The Bishop took this goodnaturedly, and I afterwards visited him at Bishop’s, Auckland, where I had much interesting talk with him on the possibility of a more permanent use of the diaconate and others matters. Alluding to my work being in a largely Presbyterian community, he remarked that use had been made of his discursus on the episcopate attached to his commentary on the epistle of the Corinthians, which he never contemplated and purposed to correct.
When the conference resumed for the consideration of reports, and when that of the committee appointed to consider the best mode of maintaining unity was presented, the suggested supremacy of the Archbishop of Canterbury appeared not under the title of Patriarch, but under that of a Metropolitan of the Anglican Communion. Before the discussion began I spoke to the Archbishop of York, and asked him to point out the incongruity of the proposition. He, however, declined on the ground that his relation to the Archbishop of Canterbury made the matter too delicate for him to take up. I then addressed myself to the Bishop of Lincoln (Christopher Wordsworth) as one most highly qualified to expose the unconstitutional character of the recommendation. The Bishop, however, said he thought it would be much better if I did so myself, as being more concerned in the matter. Feeling myself to be so young and unknown a Bishop, I did not rise until, at the close of a desultory and inconsequential a discussion, the President said he would put the question for the adoption of the report. I began by saying that I felt too deeply the gravity of the situation to remain silent upon the question, and must at the last moment discharge my conscience upon it. I said that the eyes of the most learned canonists of other communions would certainly be upon such an assembly of Bishops, and would criticise its pronouncements and actions. I reminded my hearers that we were only, after all, a deliberating assembly, and could not officiall}' constitute anything, but that nevertheless the weight which would attach to our recommendations would be such as to make it of the utmost importance that such recommendations should not depart from the ancient principles of determinations of the Church. I said that to establish a universal Metropolitanate would be to invade both the principles and the former decisions of the Church, and I pointed out that the authority of a Metropolitan was, like that of a Bishop, to be exercised in a determinate geographical area, and could not extend beyond it. I fortified my arguments by quoting the well-known Sixth Canon of the Council of Nice, which begins by saying “ Let the ancient customs prevail,” and then lays down “that affairs of a Province (eparcate) should be decided within the Province to which they relate,” and adds “Let their privileges be secured to the churches.” After remarking that similar conclusions could be quoted from other councils of the fourth century, as Antioch and Sardica, I remarked that since the authority of the Archbishop as a Metropolitan did not extend either into the neighbouring countries of Scotland or Ireland, I failed to understand how it could be made to reach the Church at the Anti-
86
Lambeth Conference
podes. I then resumed my seat without making any proposal with regard to the terms of the report. After a few moments of silence, during which the Archbishop looked round the assembly, the Bishop of Lincoln rose and said in his stately manner; “If the Bishop of Dunedin will propose an amendment I shall do myself the honour of seconding it.” I then proposed—“ That all the words contained in the report which referred to a metropolitical jurisdiction be deleted.” The Archbishop said: “I suppose I must put the amendment to the meeting.” It was then put and carried nemine contradicente.
An incident of the past which caused me to be especially interested in the question of Provincial Independence and to have studied it closely was the fact that Bishop Gray, Metropolitan of South Africa, had visited me at Shelton Rectory at the time when the case of Bishop Colenso was before the English law courts, and the Bishop of Capetown was occupied, during his visit to me, in writing the pamphlets in which he set forth the grounds upon which he had acted, the courts of England having set aside his judgment on the ground that the Metropolitan had no authority to pronounce it. This was in the sixties, when the idea still prevailed that ecclesiastical authority was centered in England, because the Church is popularly, but incorrectly, called the Church of England everywhere. The endowments of the See of Natal remained in the possession of Bishop Colenso, but the Church provided funds for the support of another Bishop, and the name of the See was changed from that of Natal to that of Maritzberg. The new Bishop, Dr Macrorie, was the brother of one of my church officers in Invercargill, and Bishop Macrorie had a seat in the Lambeth Conference of which I have spoken.
For the sake of orderly arrangement I will include in this chapter all that I think it worth while to say in connection with my attendance at other meetings of the Lambeth Conference, and subsequently describe as special episodes any noteworthy incidents which occurred within the intervals.
The conference of 1888 is memorable to me rather from the remarkable kindness to me of its distinguished President than from the deliberations and decisions of the conference itself; though of the latter I may say that I took a very special interest in the work of one committee of which I was a member—viz., the one appointed to consider the relation of the Anglican Communion (a) to the Scandinavian and other reformed Churches, and (b) to the Old Catholics and other Reforming Bodies. My reason for taking a special interest in this subject was because in the year 1879 I had visited several countries in the north of Europe and held considerable intercourse with the authorities of the bodies mentioned. Of this journey I propose to give an account later on; but perhaps I may here venture to say that the report of that committee adopted by the conference bears marks of the impressions produced by my accounts of those visits.
There were four New Zealand Bishops present at that meeting of the conference—viz., Bishops Suter, Cowie, Stuart and myself. A few
Lambeth Conference.
87
years before this time I had visited the Friendly Islands, and also the Samoan group, and also held much correspondence with Bishop J. R. Selwyn, of Melanesia, and Mr Floyd, of Levuka, in Fiji, relative to the episcopal oversight of Fiji itself, or at all events the making of arrangements for occasional episcopal visits. The report which I made to our General Synod of 1866 led to the Bishops being requested to consider what steps should be taken in relation to the whole matter. This was done with the assistance of the Primate of Australia, at that time on a visit to New Zealand, and the result of their deliberations was communicated to the Synod; the gist of which was that, for reasons given, the duty of such supervision could best be discharged by the Church in New Zealand, and that in the meantime the Bishops have requested the Bishop of Dunedin to act as correspondent in the matter. This resolution will be found printed on page 213 of the Report of that Session of the General Synod. In accordance with this request I subsequently arranged for a visit to be made by the Bishop of Nelson (Suter), and supplied him with such information as I possessed for his assistance in his mission.
It is necessary for me to introduce this history of what had already occurred into my account of the happenings connected with the Lambeth Conference of 1888 in order to explain the incident which I will now proceed to relate.
The Church in New Zealand is precluded from any action of a formal or organised character in reference to Fiji or other islands in the Pacific by the well-known claims of the Bishops of London to have authority in episcopal matters in those parts. Bishop Selwyn had justified his establishment of the Melanesian Mission on the ground that the southernmost groups of islands were included in the definition of the boundaries of his Diocese, although that definition was founded on a manifest mistake. I suggested, therefore, to the other New Zealand Bishops that we should take advantage of the opportunity afforded by our being in London together to seek an interview with the Bishop of London with a view to asking him to surrender any authority, real or imaginary, which he was supposed to have in the Church affairs of the Antipodes. This was done, and the Bishop met us in one of the corridors of Lambeth Palace. After listening to our exposition of the position, and our reasons for approaching him, Bishop Temple at once replied in a half jocular but decisive manner: “Well, gentlemen, what you have said is very interesting; but what belonged to the Bishops of London before my time will belong to the Bishops who come after me. I shall leave things as they are.” The Bishops did not pursue the matter any further, but took their leave. For my own part, however, I could not feel satisfied. No consideration had been given to the question of the validity of the supposed authority of the Bishop of London or how he obtained it. I therefore wrote and asked the Bishop if he would kindly allow me an opportunity of a further conversation on the subject. He then named a time at which I could meet him at the Athenaeum. On the date named we had a very frank but pleasant talk. On the Bishop asking me what it was I wanted,
Lambeth Conference
83
I replied at once; “ Well, my Lord, I want to know upon what grounds you base your claim to have any episcopal authority in Fiji, or Tongoa, or in any of the South Pacific Islands?” He said: “Oh, I don’t know; but it has always been held that the clergy sent into any part where our Church is not fully organised must be licensed by the Bishop of London.” “Pardon me,” I said, “but you will remember that the early Church held that the responsibility of the Church for the conversion of the heathen, or for the spiritual interests of Christians scattered in heathen lands, lay with the nearest ecclesiastical province of the organised Church. But as to the license of the Bishop of London, do you know,” I asked, “how that came about?” “Well, what is your idea about that?” said the Bishop. I replied that to the best of my knowledge it came to pass through the need of sending out chaplains to the special settlements made in America about the end of the seventeenth century. Almost all the vessels with immigrants sailed from London Bridge, and it was argued, therefore, that they and any clergy sent with them were last in the Diocese of London. " I think it was on this ground,” said I, “ that an Order in Council was issued in the reign of Charles II that ‘the chaplains for our plantations in Florida’ be licensed and continue under the charge of the Bishop of London. If that be so,” said I, jokingly, “your Lordship should go and try to exercise your authority over the clergy of Florida!” “Of course you know that is nonsense,” said he. “Of course I know that it is impossible,” said I, “ but I fail to see that because you cannot exercise your authority in the country for which it was given, you can exercise it everywhere else.” “ Oh, you are too logical!” exclaimed the Bishop, rising and shaking hands. “ But I tell you what,” added he, still holding my hand, “ I can give you a commission to act for me wherever you want to act.” “ Pardon me,” I said, “ but that won’t do. I could not accept it, because what I consider the false position would still remain.” And so the case was left for the time.
I have already mentioned the kindness which I received from Archbishop Benson, and this was shown on many occasions, having visited him at Addington, thrice dined and more than once lunched with him at Lambeth. I felt emboldened to consult him as a friend relative to my private affairs before leaving England for New Zealand. I had reason to believe that through the friendly offices of connections who had influence in high quarters I might possibly be appointed to a certain Deanery then vacant. I had, however, great scruples as to the spiritual lawfulness of laying aside the Apostolic Office for a position of dignity and emolument which gave no opportunity for the exercise of the charismata which I believed were bestowed by consecration to the episcopate. I wrote to the Archbishop on the subject, and received from him a sympathetic and appreciative reply. A short time afterwards I received a note inviting me to lunch at Lambeth. There were several persons of distinction present at the luncheon, but afterwards I was taken by the Archbishop into his private room, where he engaged me in conversation about my work in New Zealand and
89
Lambeth Conference.
asked questions as to the conditions of it, all of which I explained fully, but without the slightest suspicion that he had any special object in view, I put it all down to friendly regard and arising out of my request for his advice. When the Archbishop referred to the recent death of the Bishop Suffragan of Dover, and the vacancy there, it suddenly dawned upon me that I was being sounded with reference thereto, and, in answer to some more direct inquiry, I exclaimed in haste: “Your Grace, I would not be a Hack Bishop to anybody!” I at once felt that I had been very rude, but the Archbishop only replied: “ Well, I have heard of a Gig Bishop, and I have heard of a Tulchan Bishop, but I never heard of a Hack Bishop before.” I apologised, and explained that my sudden ejaculation was a consequence of a talk with a friend who occupied the position of a suffragan, and who was not happy in his position. We afterwards had some further conversation, and I told the Archbishop that I had been recently considering very seriously what it was right for me to do with regard to my Bishopric of Dunedin, and that in spite of difficulties and trials I had come to the conclusion that it would be wrong for me to resign at that juncture. That even what had been accomplished seemed to be too insecure, and that should the See be long vacant, as seemed probable, it was likely that what had been done would fall to pieces. With many thanks, therefore, for his gracious consideration, I must be content to shoulder my burden and return. I may add that mentioning this episode to Dean Bradley, of Westminster, with whom I was somewhat intimate, he said I had made a great mistake.
I ought to explain that my use of the opprobrious term of Hack Bishop in reference to the position of suffragans was the outcome of a talk with my old friend and neighbour, the Rev. Sir Lovelace Stamer, who had become suffragan to the Bishop of Lichfield. He had said, ' 1 wish I were in your shoes. You are your own master. This is the sort of thing that happens to me. I get home from a good hard day’s work in my parish (Stoke-on-Trent), and am preparing for dinner, when I get a telegram to say, ‘Please take the confirmation to-night at .’ ” and my friend added, “Probably the Bishop was going to dine with some nobleman; so you see I am just a hack.” That talk being fresh in my mind led to my ejaculation.
Before returning to New Zealand I resumed my efforts to raise money on behalf of the Diocese. I preached over 40 sermons, chiefly on behalf of the Theological College, but I also sought subscriptions from personal friends and private individuals on behalf of my Cathedral Building Fund. Staying a short time with the Dean of York (Purey Cust), I preached twice in the great minster. The Duke of Clarence, then present in York, taking tea with us at the Deanery. I also preached at Westminster Abbey; Mrs Benson and daughter being present. I was also invited to Fridge Castle, and preached in the private chapel and the church at the other end of the park. Lady Abergavenny sent me fi in a note. The Marquis resembled my uncle William both in size and features. I also preached twice in Ely Cathedral, staying two nights with the Bishop and Lady Alwyn
Lambeth Conference
90
Compton. Lady Compton showed me some children’s clothing said to have belonged to the children of King Charles I.
Before leaving England I paid a farewell call upon the Archbishop to thank him for his kindness, and he said: “I am sure you will get over your troubles.”
This is probably the best point at which to describe my further efforts to free the Pacific Islands from the supposed ecclesiastical jurisdiction of the Bishop of London. I was the more forward in this matter because the General Synod of 1886 had before it a “Resolution of the Bishops (of New Zealand) with reference to the episcopal supervision of Fiji, Samoa and Adjacent Islands,” and this resolution included a request that I should act as correspondent in the matter. I had carried out the duties thus imposed upon me, and I still possess a portfolio of letters from the many persons interested in this subject, such as the Consuls in Samoa, the clerg}' in Fiji and private individuals. This correspondence made it evident that this supposed authority of the Bishop of London put the Church into a very disadvantageous position in comparison with that occupied by other religious bodies. They could act freely, and did so, while the Bishop of London practically could not act at all. At the same time the clergy and political authorities in Fiji hesitated to accept direction from New Zealand, both because Fiji was a Crown Colony, and because a certain bequest on behalf of the endowment of a Bishopric of the Church of England was thought to be jeopardised by any formal connection with the Church of another country. There was also the important question of support from the Society for the Propagation of the Gospel and other aid from England. I had made the acquaintance of Lord Knutsford, at that time Secretary of State for the Colonies, and being asked to dine at his house, I took occasion to explain to him the ecclesiastical position and how it came about that the Bishop of London was supposed to have episcopal authority there. Lord Knutsford thought there must be some Order in Council of a later date which, perhaps, mentioned Fiji specifically; but, if not, he thought he could probably obtain an Order which should vest the authority over that Crown Colony in the Primate of New Zealand, and suggested my consulting the Bishop of London on the subject. This I did, and copies of the following letters, written on the eve of my departure from England, will explain how the matter was left:—
22 Holland Road, Kensington, W., December 1, 1888,
Dear Lord Knutsford, — Church matters in Fiji. I have to-day had an interview with the Bishop of London on this subject, and am able to report:—
(1) That there is no Order in Council purporting to give the Bishop of London any jurisdiction in regions beyond his Diocese of more recent date than the reign of Charles 11. From this it is clear that Fiji cannot be specifically mentioned; but
(2) The Bishop, having issued certain licenses, thinks it would be quite the best way to free him of any real or imaginary responsibility by obtaining, if
91
possible, an Order in Council which should definitely commit the ecclesiastical charge of the Crown Colony of Fiji to the Primate of New Zealand, or to some Bishop to be appointed by him.
The Bishop authorises me to say that the issue of such an Order in Council would be a satisfaction to him as likely to contribute to the efficient conduct of Church work in the South Pacific.
I should perhaps add that when the Primate of Australia, Bishop Barry, met the Bishops of New Zealand in conference he agreed that it w’ould be better for us to take all islands lying to the east and north-east of New Zealand, and for the Church in Australia to do what it could for New Guinea and the work of the Melanesian Mission.
I leave England on Friday next. If your Lordship will be so good as to secure the granting of such an Order in Council as you suggested and I have described in this letter, perhaps you would also be so good as to cause a copy of it to be addressed to me at Bishopsgrove, Dunedin, New Zealand, as the General Synod is to meet there on the 13th of February next.
I am, Your Lordship’s obliged and obedient servant,
S. T. Dunedin.
Correspondent for the Pacific Islands.
The Right Hon. Lord Knutsford, etc., etc
A further letter from the Bishop of London on this subject was received on the morning of December 5, and replied to by me just as I was leaving for my ship. The following is a copy of each;—
Fulham Palace,
December 4, 1888.
MV Dear Bishop OF Dunedin, —Will you bear in mind that Mr John Campbell’s Bequest for the establishment of a Bishopric in Fiji lapses if Fiji be handed over to the Church of New Zealand PERMANENTLY ? IThc underlining is by the Bishop.]
The Executors say that, acting under his instructions, they cannot pay it over to a Bishop who belongs to an independent Church.
I am not sure that the best way of proceeding would not be to get S.P.G. tc withdraw their grants from Fiji and to pay them to the New Zealand Synod on condition that that Synod takes charge of Fiji. With this I should readily concur. Yours very truly, F. Londin.
My reply;-.
22 Holland Road, Kensington
December 5, 1888.
My Dear Lord Bishop, —The point raised by you is one of importance— i.e., the terms of the Cornpbell Bequest. 1 think, however, it would be met by some words in the Order in Council making the arrangement with the Primate of New Zealand provisional until such time as it may be expedient to create a Bishopric in Fiji. This, 1 think, would be better titan the course proposed by your Lordship,
Lambeth Conference
Lambeth Conference
92
inasmuch as it would satisfy the clergy and laity in Fiji that everything was done in an orderly way. If nothing more were done than the transferring of the S.P.G. grants the State and Church question would still be open, and make it awkward for a Bishop to visit from New Zealand. Hoping that this may commend itself to your judgment.
I am, Vour Lordship's faithful servant and brother.
S. T. Dunedin,
P.S.—The S.P.G. grants should be transferred in any case, and Mr Tucker says he will bring this before the Society on receiving a note from you to that effect.
No further communication was ever received- by me upon this subject, and I shrewdly suspect that if Lord Knutsford mentioned the question of an Order in Council to the Cabinet or to the Prime Minister he would receive advice not to pursue the proposal as being fraught with the probability of disturbance from other quarters. At all events the position with regard to Fiji remained in statu quo until my last visit to England in 1907. When again discussing the subject with the then Bishop of London and the Archbishop of Canterbury it was eventually decided by them that they would themselves choose and consecrate a Bishop for Fiji and the South-eastern Pacific, which it is well known was eventually done. My own plan was rather to obtain additional help from S.P.G. on behalf of Bishop Willis, of Tonga, and to place all the Eastern Pacific under his charge (including Fiji), and for him to seek affiliation with the Province of New Zealand, urging in support of this the fact that the Cook Islands were already within the jurisdiction of the Primate of New Zealand.
MY VISITS TO TONGA, SAMOA. AND FIJI.
Although I have had to make mention of my interest in the Islands of the South Pacific in the course of my narrative, I did not wish to interrupt the scope of it by any detailed account of my visits to particular groups of such islands. Those visits were made not so much as holiday trips from my regular work as they were of inquiry into the -religious and ecclesiastical conditions which prevailed in the several parts.
To this end I set forth in the year 1884, in company with the Rev. Algernon Kerkham, one of my clergy, whom I invited to accompany me both as my chaplain for the occasion and also that the value of my own observations might be supported those of a companion. We first called upon the Primate, Bishop Harper, whose approval of my enterprise I had already obtained, and he graciously bestowed his blessing upon our undertaking.
Arrived in Auckland, we took our passage in a small steamer called the “Janet Nichol,” then trading amid several groups of islands on behalf of an Auckland company. In a few days we arrived in the Friendly Islands, and threading our way through the somewhat intricate channel up to Nukualofa, the capital of Tonga, the captain directed our attention to a patch of light green water easily distinguishable from its surroundings and indicative of shallowness. “ I have been looking out for some time,” said he, “for that spot, for on my last voyage there was an island there of some 50 feet in height. It had been thrown up suddenly, and seems to have sunk again as fast.” He said this was not a very uncommon phenomenon, and he attributed its occurrence to volcanic eruptions under the sea, and, of course, they added to the anxieties of voyaging. As soon as our arrival was known we were waited upon by no less a personage than Mr Baker, the Premier, and practically the king of the Tonga group of islands. He kindly invited us to his house, but as one of my objects was to ascertain the truth of the extraordinary stories afloat about him and his doings, I declined to accept his hospitality, notwithstanding that I had made the acquaintance of his daughters in New Zealand.
To make the position plain I must give a brief account of this man and his doings before our arrival in Tonga. This is the more necessary because the matter rose to the height of political as well as of ecclesiastical importance, though the circumstances are at this time almost forgotten. The volcanic catastrophe of the German war has obliterated the memory of the little rumblings which preceded it.
Mr Baker, a man of great natural ability, was sent to the Friendly Islands under the auspices of the Wesleyan Missionary Society of England, He soon acquired a perfect mastery of the language, and
My Visits to Tonga, Samoa, and Fiji.
8g
by his strong personality became a power in the land. Ido not doubt that his earlier motives were largely for the good of the natives, socially and intellectually, as well as religiously. His influence eventually dominated that of even the principal chiefs, and, perhaps, as he perceived this, his ambitions grew with his power, and he conceived the idea of establishing a kingdom of Tonga. He did not proclaim himself king, but caused the head of the family of Tubou to be recognised under that name. His financial arrangements made the country prosperous, and in his desire for complete independence he broke away from his allegiance to the authorities of the Wesleyan Mission and set up what he called the Free Church of Tonga. In this he was ably assisted by a Mr Watkin, the son of the Wesleyan minister whom I have mentioned as being at Waikouaiti when Bishop Selwyn arrived there in 1844. The Islands had been divided into districts, with subordinate teachers over each, and committees, generally presided over by the chiefs. An annual conference was held at Nukualofa, and the Church finance was aided in no small degree by a collection made in the large wooden church built in imitation of a cathedral, with its towers and spires, near to the king’s house. Mr Baker told me that on this annual occasion two large receptacles were placed conspicuously in the centre of the church, and in the presence of the king and all his magnates the people cast in their contributions with considerable display, as the amount thrown in by each was the subject of much discussion afterwards. The coins in use were at that time chiefly silver dollars of Spanish origin. Such a conference was going on at the time of our arrival, and we were invited to seats within it. The ministers and chiefs of the districts came up in turn and gave a verbal report of their several districts. Mr Baker spared no pains to do us honour, and a very remarkable gathing took place during our visit, there had recently been held a very large gathering of chiefs to consider the question of succession to the throne, as George Tubou was an old man and had no son. For this meeting a large building had been erected of a T shape, with a platform at the broad end. It was lined and roofed with leaves from the cocoa palms well tied together, and all round at the junction of walls and roof were a frieze of calico strips inscribed in coloured letters with texts and mottoes. Mr Baker summoned a gathering of the clans to give us a great reception. The captain, officers and passengers of the “Janet Nichol” were also invited. The Royal Brass Band played, and played well, at intervals during the ceremonies, and the students of the large school, with their English tutors, surprised us by the exhibition of their skill in the solution of arithmetical and mathematical problems, not shrinking from illustrations of the binomial theorem. Mr Baker explained that I was “ a Chief Officer of the Queen’s religion,” and some complimentary addresses were made by leading natives.
Notwithstanding the great attention paid us by Mr Baker, Mr Kerkham and I determined to be as impartial as possible in our inquiries, and for that purpose we told him of our intention to call upon the Rev. Mr Moulton, who represented the original Wesleyan
My Visits to Tonga, Samoa, and Fi
go
Mission, a man of good education, but of a highly nervous and excitable nature. His antipathy to Mr Baker led to his use of somewhat violent language, and his accusations of tyrannical and even wicked actions on Mr Baker’s part were very astonishing. Amongst other charges he said that a few days before our arrival Baker had caused three men to be hung on a tree he pointed to in the village. As Mr Moulton was pacing round his room while he talked, I whispered to Mr Kerkham, “ Well we can easily find out whether that is true or not!” So on leaving the house, after about an hour’s interview, we agreed to inquire of the first person we met who could understand the English language. This turned out to be a native, but on our propounding the question to him whether such a thing had happened, he threw up his hands and walked off, exclaiming as he did so: “ O, that is Mr Moulton!” and left us to our own conclusions.
We were afterwards introduced to “the king,” George Tubou, and were shown an oil picture of the Emperor of Germany on horseback, which had been sent as a present from “his brother monarch,” it was alleged, through the instrumentality of Mr Baker, who was pretty openly charged with complicity with German designs.
Leaving Nukualofa, we visited Navau and the village at the head of the fine harbour of that island. There we saw the women engaged in the manufacture of the paper cloth made from the inner bark of a certain tree. By the kindness of our captain we entered the remarkable caves in the coastline of the island by use of the ship’s boat, and then proceeded on our way to Samoa.
On arrival at Apia, we had hardly dropped anchor before a Wesleyan minister came on board, and on my expressing surprise at finding that denomination represented in a place which it was understood had been assigned by an unwritten compact to the members of the London Missionary Society, that gentleman exclaimed: “ Oh, we don’t undertake not to go anywhere; we hold it our business to go wherever we see an opening.” I thought how much more was this the bounden duty of the Church. Mr Kerkham and I took the earliest opportunity of calling upon the missionary of the London Missionary Society in Apia with reference to holding Divine sendee on the Sunday. That society having been originally founded in alliance with the English Church, we naturally looked for co-operation on his part. Our special object in calling was to obtain the use of a certain building which bore upon its walls the painted announcement that it was for the use of any religious denomination, but which we found in the possession of this missionary. Although he possessed a church of his own he used this for a Sunday school. We found him and his wife, who joined in the interview, a little stiff and disposed to say that we could not have the building. On my observing that I understood that quite a number of persons would be glad to have an Anglican service, and that if he refused us the use of the building referred to I should publicly announce that such a service would be held on board the steamer, he finally allowed
My Visits to Tonga, Samoa, and Fiji
96
us to hold therein an evening service, and said that if we consented to that arrangement his choir would assist with the musical arrangements, We presently afterwards found another difficulty. A small circus company had accompanied us from Auckland, and as the time was short they proposed to hold an entertainment on the Sunday evening. They had some horses and trained acrobats on board, and as no such show had ever before visited Samoa, it was probable that the performance would prove fatal to the attendance of the people at the proposed service. I eventually made a compact with the manager of this company that if he would defer his performance till the Monday evening I would do my part to aid him by securing the attendance of the king and his magnates. This was faithfully carried out on both sides. The performers attended our service in a packed congregation and we attended the performance, and a very remarkable occasion it was. King Maleotoa, who was at that time in a most anxious position through the arrogant domination of the Germans, had already sent his chief officer, one Salu, who spoke English with correctness and fluency, to ask if I would pay him a visit. I went, therefore, to Salu and explained to him the nature of this exhibition, for which preparations were being made by the erection of a great marque early on the Monday morning. It was eventually arranged that I should meet the king and queen at a certain house in Apia and accompany them to the exhibition. This Mr Kerkham and I did at the time appointed. I was to walk with the queen to our appointed seats within the circus tent. I shall never forget the scene presented as we did so. The beautiful evening was illumined by lights hung in the fine trees which beautify the town, which by this time was thronged with natives, and perfect order was observed as we processed, followed by the privileged attendants of royalty to the enclosure. Inside the circus vere the European tradesmen and their wives and the clerks employed by the mercantile firms with their native concubines—an arrangement favoured by the German companies,—while above these, tier upon tier, were natives not in European dress, but men and women from the hills who had in some marvellous way got to hear of the unique visitation. There were first acrobatic performances which gave rise to many expressions of surprise and delight; but when at length the horses appeared with their guilded trappings and swirled round the building fear took possession of the crowd, and when a trained monkey flung itself from the horse’s head upon which it sat and went through a hoop covered with tissue paper, alighting again without fail upon the horse, the house was convulsed; royalty itself could not maintain its dignity unmoved. The queen shook with fear, the king half rose from his seat and grunted the word “Taipo, taipo!” (the devil, the devil), and I half thought they would rush away, but presently they recovered themselves and became calm, and all passed off well. The following morning the children of the village were occupied with vain attempts to imitate the feats of the acrobats, with the consequence that not a few bruised heads resulted from their falls.
My Visits to Tonga, Samoa, and Fiji
97
We bade farewell to the captain of the “Janet Nichols,” which proceeded on her voyage, while we remained hoping to be able to return to New Zealand via Fiji, as we heard that schooners occasionally went that way. We were invited by Mr Bell, a schoolmaster of Apia, to stay at his house, where we were not only very hospitably entertained, but where we learned much of the political and social condition of the place. During our stay Mr Bell gave a dinner party, to which both the English, the American and the German Consuls were invited. The latter, a nephew of Prince Bismarck, did not appear, and the former excused himself on account of ill-health, but the American gentleman made himself very agreeable and expressed regret that the English Government did not take a stronger line against the Germans, from whom he expected something like a coup d’etat. An Italian Marquis, who was visiting Samoa for scientific purposes, proved a valuable contribution to an enjoj’able evening.
On another occasion we dined at the residence of a German trader named Ruge. He had married an English lady, and their two sons had lately returned from a good English school. They had both been confirmed, and, with their mother, seemed very glad to see us. We were most beautifully waited upon by trained native boys, and the gardens, which we could see through the open windows, glowed with the transcendent brilliance yet etherial softness of a tropical sunset in the southern ocean.
The most notable circumstance of our visit to Samoa, however, was rather of political than religious interest. The firm of Godefroi and Co., as the chief trading firm in Apia was called, was really more of a political bureau than a business concern, and they were setting up a puppit of their own to take the place of poor Maleotoa, the socalled king. Tamisesse, the man I refer to, was indeed a high chief, but without just claim to the highest position. He was adopted by the Germans and stimulated by them to claim the throne because this mode of virtually seizing the Samoan Islands would cause less trouble in England or America than if they had openly declared them to be a German possession. Maleotoa, conceiving, I suppose, that I was a person of great political influence, sent Salu to ask whether I would meet him and his council at his house? This I consented to do, and on the appointed day Mr Kerkham and I presented ourselves at Mulimu, which the king’s private property, and a little outside of Apia. We found all seated, the king in a chair placed a little in front of his council, and two chairs had been placed for us opposite to the king, while Salu, as interpreter, was to stand at my side. I commenced by explaining that I was not a political magnate, and therefore that little or nothing was to be expected from my visit; but that if it were thought well to charge me with any message I would see that it reached the proper quarter. The king then pointed to an engraved portrait of Queen Victoria, which hung upon the wall, and said that he and his people much desired that that great lady should take them under her protection, and they would obey her law. In reply, I asked whether they wished the Queen to take possession of
My Visits to Tonga, Samoa, and Fiji
98
their country, and, if so, why they did so? After a few moments consultation with his council the king replied in words which were thus interpreted: “ Because if she did so every man would enjoy his own; but if the Germans got the country no man would have anything to enjoy!” The king said he was in bodily fear of his life, and it was pointed out to me that the Germans had erected a gallows just outside the king’s grounds, and it was declared that the Germans had intimated to him that if he went outside his property he would be forthwith hung upon this gallows tree. I said that the Germans were only trying to frighten him into resigning, and that with the English and American Consuls in Apia they dare not do it. At the close of this audience, however, I wrote an account of what I had heard and seen to Lord Salisbury, then Prime Minister, and whom I had met on more than one occasion. Some time afterwards I received a reply from him thanking me for my letter, but saying that the Government could not afford to run the risk of trouble with so powerful an Empire as Germany for the sake of a few islands which were so small as almost to look like pin-points on the map.
The few English and American church people told us they could never receive the blessed sacrament since the minister of the London Missionary Society, whose services they usually attended, used cocoanut milk in administering the cup instead of the element of wine as appointed by our Lord Himself. We decided, therefore, before leaving, to hold a celebration of the Holy Communion for such as were desirous of receiving it at our hands. Early one morning, therefore, we met about 40 persons of various nationalities, including Swedes, in the room of a private house which had been lent to us for the purpose. I shall never forget the occasion. Accustomed as I had been to taking celebrations on board ship and in other exceptional circumstances, I had never been witness of so much sacred emotion. Strong men wept openly as they received the cup of salvation, and I shook hands with all as they left the room at the close of the service, and the sincere expression of thanks from all was a proof to me that this truly Catholic communion had been felt as a blessing.
Failing to secure a passage to Fiji in accordance with our original intention, I arranged with the firm of Godefroi and Co. to carry Mr Kerkham and myself in the schooner which carried their mail out to sea to intercept the steamer of the American line then running between San Francisco and Auckland, and was calculated to pass the Island of Tutuilla at a certain date. Before going on board I had some talk with the German manager of the firm about their political action. I asked him what was the meaning of what I had observed going on at the back of their premises when taking an early morning walk a day or two before. I had seen the young clerks of the establishment and some others drilling in a large yard quite in military fashion. He said, “ Oh, in a climate like this we find such early morning exercises the best way to keep our young men in health!” I replied: “But what about the two or three small canon they were dragging about, and sometimes pretending to load?” “Those guns,” said he, “were taken
My Visits to Tonga, Samoa, and Fiji
99
from a warship which was wrecked on this coast some years ago, and the men amuse themselves as tests of strength of one set of men against another.” I admired the ingenuity of his replies, but thought my own thoughts.
The distance we had to travel was about 70 miles, and all was ready for a start in the afternoon. As soon as we reached the outer point of the harbour, however, the skipper let down the sail, and about a dozen natives came off from the shore in canoes and, scrambling on board, left their boats to be picked up by their friends, and up went the sail again and we were off. I protested to the half-caste skipper that I had hired such accommodation as the vessel could supply, but he laughed and said he was ordered to take these men to Tutuilla, and so when night came on Kerkham and I had to lie sandwiched between these men on the deck. In the course of the night, a heavy tropical shower coming on, I let myself down through the manhole into the little cabin below, intending to sleep on the bench which occupied one side of it; but I was soon driven up again, cockroaches as long as my finger swarmed upon the walls and ceiling, from which they were constantly dropping on to the bench itself. The heat also and the stench were alike insupportable. We breakfasted on fried schnapper, which the captain caught as fast as he could throw in his line, and presently we put into the very beautiful little bay of Leone, with its native village at the foot of the hills; the view being rendered more picturesque by the tower and spire of the well-built little church which was the fruit of the French Roman Catholic Mission, which had been established there only about two years before. We made our way to the beach through a break in the coral reef which just allowed the passage of a boat, and were safely piloted through the breakers which dashed upon it. Walking through the village we saw the ruins of a wooden church, belonging to the London Missionary Society, and the minister’s house deserted, the windows of which were boarded up. We were soon surrounded by a party of lively and handsome native boys who, observing our close inspection of this neglected mission station, volubly explained in their own language the absence of the “ miniter.” As usual, we found one or two half-caste boys, the sons of English or American sailors who had deserted their ships through the attractions of the island or the islanders, and these, speaking a little English, attached themselves to us and became very useful leaders. From these we learned that the “ miniter ” had long ago gone away “buy copra,” from which we understood he had taken to trade. As against this sad exhibition of a case of a modern Demas we soon had a striking illustration of the way in which Christian missions should be carried on. Whilst examining the interior of the church I have already spoken of we were accosted by one of the two French priests in charge of the mission. We were invited to take luncheon at the Presbytery, and, accepting the invitation, we were informed that besides the mission staff of two priests and certain subordinates, there was a band of Sisters belonging to a Missionary Order; that all the furniture of the coral-built church was sent from
My Visits to Tonga, Samoa, and Fiji
100
France, including a wrought iron and brass screen across the chancel. We were informed that although the mission had only been established for two years the membership was 700, and was increasing. This reminds me of what the Roman Catholic Bishop resident in Apia informed me during a visit of a compliment he politely made. After expressing surprise that the Anglican Church had no mission in Samoa, he said: “ Well, if you don’t come soon you need not come at all, for we shall have the whole population before very long!” This was a good many years ago, but 1 do not think his prophesy has yet been fulfilled.
We returned to our vessel for the night, and upon the following morning a half-caste native, who held a prominent position on the island, desired an interview with me. He said he had been engaged all night in a corrobery with the men who had accompanied us from Apia. He explained that the object of these men was to get him and his people to join Tamasesse, and it seemed to have been suggested that I, as an Englishman of importance, had something to do with their advent. The poor man was much distressed, and asked me what he should do. After telling him that the emissaries were doubtless sent by the Germans, I asked him whether Maleotoa was not his rightful king and whether his allegiance was not due to him? To which he replied: “Yes, but Maleotoa sits still, like an old woman. He used to be a great warrior, and he ought to get up and fight Tamasesse.” I said this was not his fault. The English and American Consuls would not let him fight, as this would be to give the Germans an excuse for overthrowing him and seizing the country. “ What then am I to do?” said he. “Go back,” I replied, “and be very strong. Tell the men that you stand by Maleotoa, that Tamasesse has no right. That you did not ask them to come, and that you would say no more to them.” With this he seemed pleased, and went off in his skiff. A few minutes afterwards I saw him running along the beach swinging his arms over his head as if quite brave.
Shortly afterwards we urged the skipper to put out of the harbour and search for the mail boat we were to intercept, and this he did, and none too soon, for the same afternoon the steamer hove in sight, and m due course we met her, and it afforded no small amusement to the passengers to see a Bishop and his chaplain being hauled up the side of the ship one by one grasping a rope which had also been passed round the waist. We were kindly welcomed on board and invited by the captain into his cabin, and shortly, without further adventure, we found ourselves once more in Auckland, and took the first coasting steamer to our homes. I made my report to the Primate; but the real outcome of my observation and experiences found utterance in Synods and similar occasions.
THE LAST THIRTY YEARS.
The history of the last thirty years of my life and work must be given in the briefest outline, both because the details of it would swell my volume to inordinate length and because the later years present little in the character of that work to distinguish it from the more ordinary oversight and development of any Diocese set up in a newly-settled country. My work was rendered, no doubt, more difficult from the fact that the members of the Anglican Communion, at first a very small minority, are still perhaps less than one-third of the general population, since this part of New Zealand formed the area of the special settlement of the Presbyterian Free Church, the authorities of which obtained very considerable endowments by virtue of the charter under which they came. Our relations have always been of a friendly character; but in the foundation of such institutions as my Divinity College and Cathedral, both of which I was quietly working for from year to year, was certainly made much more difficult from the fact of our being in a minority. There are few of my Synod addresses in which I did not allude to these institutions and urge the importance of fostering them; but I had always to put first the support of the clergy and the supply of religious ministrations for the people. To the church folk of this Diocese who possess copies of the Synod Reports up to the close of the year 1919 these appeals will be familiar, and a glance at my annual addresses will refresh their memories of much history and the discussions of many social and ecclesiastical questions to which I have addressed myself from time to time.
Resuming then the general outline of my history, I record that at the close of my work in England in 1888 Mrs Nevill and I returned to New Zealand by the Red Sea, arriving early in 1889, and that not long afterwards—viz., in the following month—the Session of the General Synod was held in Dunedin. The Venerable Primate, Bishop Harper, of Christchurch, presided at this Session for the last time,' and to it he announced his intended resignation in order that his successor might be duly elected thereat. The election itself resulted, on the third ballot, in the choice of Bishop Hadfield, of Wellington, to be Primate, the fitness of which was felt by many not only on account of his marked ability and his connection with the framers of the Church Constitution, but also as a link with the earliest evangelisation of the Natives of New Zealand.
The retiring Primate, in his opening addressed, alluded to the fact that at that time 30 years had passed since the first Session of the General Synod. He had been one of the fathers of it, having been 33 years Bishop of Christchurch, and it is now a little difficult to remember how young we are as a Provincial Church, accustomed as
The Last Thirty Years
102
we are to the regular and well-established conduct of our ecclesiastical proceedings. When I resigned my Diocese on the last day of 1 9 1 9> I had held office in our Church many ) ; ears longer than any of my predecessors.
Shortly after the close of this Synod the validity of the election of Bishop Hadfield was challenged, and a special meeting of the General Synod was held in April, 1890, to make a fresh election, inasmuch as in consequence of this challenge Bishop Hadfield had resigned the Primacy. He was, however, almost unanimously reappointed to it. He resigned the Bishopric of Wellington, and consequently the Primacy in October, 1893. Good Bishop Harper died in December of the same year. The unvarying kindness I had ever experienced from him and the affectionate reverence with which I regarded him as a model prelate and true Father in God caused me to visit Christchurch in order to attend his funeral. I had visited Christchurch to take part in the consecration of Bishop Julius in May, 1890. In 1892 I took part in the consecration of Bishop Mules to the Diocese of Nelson, In 1894 in that of Bishop Cecil Wilson to the Diocese of Melanesia, rendered vacant by the resignation of Bishop John Selwyn; Bishop Cowie, of Auckland, being now the Acting Primate, and the consecration was held in Auckland. In January, 1895, I was one of the consecrators of Bishop Wallis to the See of Wellington, and of Bishop Leonard Williams to Napier; the Bishop of Salisbury taking part in the solemn function; and on the 31st of the same month the thirteenth Session of the General Synod was held in Nelson, and in this Session my old friend, formerly Rector of Stafford, Bishop Cowie, was elected Primate.
The Bishop of Salisbury had arrived from Melbourne towards the end of the year 1894, and was my guest for a short time at Bishopsgrove, and as shortly before this the Synod of the Diocese had constituted St. Paul’s Church, Dunedin, the Cathedral of the Diocese, I had prepared for a suitable form and ceremony recognising it as such, and the Bishop kindly consented to preach on the occasion. To the surprise of many of our people he took advantage of this, and of another opportunity afforded by a public reception which was accorded him, to set forth at some length the dangers he seemed to imagine hung over us as a Church unless some form of nexus were elaborated to connect us with the See of Canterbury in a more definite manner. My people were quite at a loss to understand what he meant, and I was interrogated by some upon the matter. I thought it my duty to write a short paper upon the question, which, before publication, I sent up to Bishop Hadfield, who, in his address to the General Synod of 1892, had shown his grasp of primitive constitutional principles and knowledge of Canon law. He urged me to publish the paper, in which I had shown that to construct any such artificial bond of union with the Church of England would be in controvention of our Catholic position and to proclaim ourselves a sect, and that, practically, any such bond, if it could be constructed, would be fraught with far
103
The Last Thirty Years
greater danger of trouble than to leave us to the maintenance of the faith of our Lord Jesus Christ in humble reliance upon the guidance of His Holy Spirit once for all given to His Church.
In 1897 I once more visited England to attend the Lambeth Conference of that year, and in the course of it was celebrated the Diamond Jubilee of Queen Victoria, a most imposing ceremony, which I viewed from my seat on the steps of St. Paul’s, London, All the fronts and roofs of the houses round St. Paul’s churchyard presented a dense mass of humanity; tier above tier of platforms being crowded to their utmost capacity. The front of the steps were lined by a row of the “Beef-eaters” from the Tower, clad in their mediaeval robes of scarlet and gold. Lord Roberts, on the famous little white horse of many battles, awaited the majestic procession as it advanced up Ludgate Hill, and Her Majesty’s carriage, drawn by six small creamcoloured horses, was brought to a stop so near to my seat that I could plainly see the tears of emotion rolling down her face when many thousand voices broke forth in the grand old hymn “All people that on earth do dwell.” The trumpets and choir of the world-cathedral leading from their rostrum in the upper portion of the facade. At one moment Albert Edward, Prince of Wales, who rode on the right of Her Majesty, leaned over from his horse and spoke a few words to his venerable mother, apparently encouraging her to support the almost overwhelming rush of feeling. At the close of the ever-memorable service, as the miles-long procession passed, cheer after cheer of hearty recognition greeted the regiments distinguished for notable achievements; the dark little Ghurkas being perhaps the most highly favoured of them all. I was called upon to preach at several places in connection with this great event. I specially remember addressing a crowded congregation at Romford Abbey, and afterwards planting a tree in the grounds and attending a function under the auspices of the Mayor. At my old parish of Shelton I was not only called upon to preach, but the several volunteer corps of the district were assembled at the Town Hall of Hanley, and, headed by the Mayor and corporation, I marched down the mile to Shelton Church, and afterwards was called upon to pass down the line of the corps of which I had once been the chaplain, and pin on the breast of each of the men who had continued in the corps from my time a little medal which had been provided for the occasion. Mrs Nevill and I were the guests of a former Church warden of mine, Mr Charles Daniel, at Chatterley House. We returned from our ninth and last voyage from England together not long afterwards.
It may serve to enliven my pages if I introduce here a trifling incident which occurred in the Lambeth Conference of 1897 above mentioned.
Bishop Temple had now become Archbishop of Canterbury, and was therefore President. He was, as always, most kind, but had been laying down from the chair the mode in which he proposed to conduct
The Last Thirty Years
104
the meetings. The plan seemed calculated to give very little opportunity of discussing some important questions, and I ventured to suggest to his Grace that many Bishops had come from great distances and might feel somewhat aggrieved if they had very little or no opportunity of sa}dng what perhaps they had come all the way to say. However, the President did not yield, and very soon after I had resumed my seat Bishop Doane, of Albany, whose acquaintance I had previously made, handed across to me his card, at the back of which was written the following impromptu limerick:—
There was a good Bishop Dunedin,
Who for freedom of action was pleadin';
But the Master said ‘‘No!
It is better to go
In the way that I choose to proceed in,”
Thus old things had passed away with the old century. My ecclesiastical neighbours of Christchurch and Wellington had become new, and it was not wonderful that these newer associates, able and estimable as they were, formed alliances more naturally between themselves than with those of the older tradition. The new century had hardly dawned when my isolation was rendered more complete by the illness and death of my quondam friend of pre-New Zealand days, Bishop Cowie, last link with Selwyn and the Lichfield Diocese. Just before the Bishop’s death, however, circumstances had occurred in relation to the Church affairs of the South Pacific which, as they became a cause of great trouble and distress to me, I think I must describe at some length in the next chapter.
The Advent of Bishop Willis to the Friendly Islands.
In the early part of this history I have spoken of my visits to Honolulu and to the vacancy in the Bishopric there which was filled by the consecration of Bishop Willis in 1872. Bishop Willis had been my guest at Shelton Rectory in that year, and I had introduced him to Bishop Selwyn at Lichfield, where he had spent a night in the discussion of a possible linking up of the Hawaiian Islands with the Ecclesiastical Province of New Zealand, a scheme which Bishop Selwyn favoured if the General Synod would give sanction to it. The cessation of the American line of steamers soon afterwards seemed to render this project impracticable, and the years passed on with no further intercourse than an occasional letter between Bishop Willis and myself. During this period the Americans had greatly increased their power in the Islands, and, about the time to which I am now alluding, the whole Hawaiian group was annexed by that Government. The surprising part of the matter, however, was that shortly afterwards the Church in America determined to establish a Bishopric in
The Last Thirty Years
105
Honolulu. Bishop Potter, of New York, is reported to have said: “The Church must follow the flag.” Bishop Willis wrote to me on the subject, and I replied that to introduce a Bishop into a See already occupied was alike contrary to Canon law and to immemorial Catholic usage, and suggesting that he should make a protest to the authorities of the Church in America, and at the same time to offer, should he think fit, to act under the authority of their Convention. The next thing which I heard was that the Archbishop of Canterbury had transferred the See to the American Church and actually induced the Society for the Propagation of the Gospel to pay the grants whicn had been made in support of Bishop Willis and his clergy to the representatives of the American Church. Bishop Willis was thus left stranded, wounded in spirit and deprived of material support. It is very remarkable that at this juncture Bishop Willis received a petition signed by, I think, about 300 natives of the Friendly Islands, saying almost in so many words: “Come over and help us!” The Bishop said he felt this to be as distinct a call from God as was St. Paul’s vision of the man of Macedonia. The appeal to Bishop Willis was probably because he had visited Tonga to confirm some Europeans there and perhaps a recollection of my own visit, of which I have given a special account. These things, added to the divided state of religious feeling between the Old Wesleyans and the Wesleyan schism under Mr Watkin, led these petitioners to seek the protection and, as they would believe, more powerful mana of the English Church. Bishop Willis then decided to accept this invitation, and betook himself, with Mrs Willis, to Nukualofa, Tonga. Thence he wrote to Bishop Cowie, as Primate of New Zealand, soliciting his countenance and advice. The Primate, feeling himself too unwell to transact business, forwarded this communication to me with a short letter in which he said: “ I have written to welcome Bishop Willis, but I must leave the future of this matter in your hands.” I was much impressed by this unexpected circumstance, and viewed it as probably somewhat connected with my own visit to Tonga. I naturally wrote to Bishop Willis in terms of warm admiration of the course he had taken, and expressed the hope that the Church of New Zealand would come to his aid and that in due time he and his mission might be affiliated to the Province of New Zealand.
It was at this time—viz., in 1902 —that Bishop Cowie died, and I became Acting Primate by reason of seniority among the Bishops. Greatly to my regret I found my brother Bishops quite opposed to my recognition of Bishop Willis. The new Bishop of Wellington regarded his advent at Tonga as an unwarrantable intrusion upon the work of the Wesleyans, and affirmed that Bishop Selwyn had made a compact with other religious bodies not to start missions in their spheres of work. I denied that Bishop Selwyn had made any such compact, courteous as he always was in his personal intercourse with the missionaries of other communions. It grieved me much that this difference of opinion not only interfered somewhat with the harmony of the episcopal bench in our private meetings, but was brought into the
The Last Thirty Years
106
General Synod, and became a scarcely veiled ground of opposition to my election to the position of Primate in the Synod of 1904.
The election of Primate of the Province of New Zealand in succession to the late Bishop Cowie on February I, 1904, was only subconsciously impressive to the ordinary onlooker. It was practically nothing but a formal balloting for the head of a society, but to those whose interest was in Church matters it was an affair of the greatest moment, for in the hands of the new Primate would rest to a large extent the future welfare of the Church under quickly-changing conditions for the remainder of his life. Speculation has been constant the last few days, and episcopacy, clergy, and laity have all been devoting considerable attention to the question. Rumour favoured the Acting Primate on account of his services to the Church in the past, quite as much as to seniority and influence in the Church. Bishop Williams’s name was also frequently mentioned as a possible elect by virtue of his great age, his being a descendant of one of the oldest missionary families, whose head did so much for the furtherance of Christ’s Church among the Maoris in ancient days, and, not least, his being the first colonial-born Bishop. Sentimental notions distinctly favoured this man of Waiapu. Bishop Julius’s name also had been mentioned, but between the first two the election was deemed to lie.
The Procedure Was Very Simple
Ballot papers, with thereon the names of each Bishop of the Province printed boldly, were distributed amongst all the Orders accredited to the Synod, and each silently eliminated the names of those Bishops for whom he did not wish to vote. No nominations, no eulogistic speeches by partisans, marred the solemnity and dignity of the proceedings. Ballot papers were as silently gathered up and taken to the place set apart to be there counted, and the spectators settled down in their seats for a lengthy wait. Within the barrier were the Bishops on their elevated bench, black-cloaked clergy, and privileged women fashionably dressed for the august occasion. Without the barrier, in the part open to the public, was a dense crowd of men and women of all classes. The suppressed hum of talk ran round the room for more than a quarter of an hour, and ceased abruptly as the door of the side room opened and the officials came forth with faces that gave none a hint of their message.
To secure the election of an ally Bishop it was necessary that he should have an absolute majority of all Orders. Failing this, another ballot would be necessary; and if that failed a third. Then, if none had a majority he who held the Acting-Primacy would become Primate. All is trusted to inspiration, to direction of the Almighty, in this solemn and rarely-exercised function, and the soundless voice of the members of the Syno’d is the accounted voice of God. Officials handed their records to the President, and he, with a perplexed air, announced “No Result.”
107
The Last Thirty Years
Surprise ran round the room, and then followed a perplexed silence, broken by the soft voice of the venerable Bishop of Nelson, who suggested that the numbers of votes of each Order should be disclosed. This was incontinently refused as against all canons of the Church, and the precedent quoted in the case of Bishop Hadfield in Dunedin in 1889, when numbers were said to be given. No retreat was made from the position. There was nothing for it then but a fresh ballot, and once more papers were distributed and returned. Excitement grew tense as the officials returned, enigmatically as before, and absolute surprise was shown when the President announced that once more the ballot had yielded
No Satisfactory Result.
Once again the matter was submitted to the arbitrament of ballot, and, most extraordinary to relate, the result was the same as before. The whole assemblage were utterly astounded, and the clergy showed uno less than the laity. Of course, the only solution of the matter is that nearly every person adhered to his original judgment. It was then announced that since these ballotings had failed to give any Bishop a majority in all three Orders, the Acting-Primate, the Right Rev. Samuel Nevill,
Bishop of Dunedin
was deemed to be appointed by God Primate of the Church of the Province of New Zealand. The announcement was received with applause, for Bishop Nevill is very popular amongst the majority of the clergy and laity, and his appointment appears to give general satisfaction. The new Primate gave a brief discourse upon the subject of the Primacy and the duties which he hopes by Divine blessing to fulfil ably and to the glory of the Church to the end of his days. (From the “Australasian,” 1904.)
It is a curious detail that the Anglican Archbishop of Melbourne, who happens to be visiting the Primate of New Zealand, should find that dignitary in Dunedin. Twenty, or even a dozen, years ago it would have been thought wildly improbable that the prelate selected to preside over the Anglican Church in New Zealand should be the Bishop of a Diocese founded in the heart of a Presbyterian settlement, where the Episcopal Church was necessarily a plant of slow and struggling growth. To the north lies the fair province of Canterbury, with its cathedral city of Christchurch, manifestly as much intended for the headquarters of Anglicanism in New Zealand as the southern Edinburgh was designed to be the rallying point for the disciples of John Knox. Yet the Primacy has never been centred at Christchurch since the time of Bishop Plarper, nearly 20 years ago, and just now it has passed (by seniority in default of election) to the prelate who has had the most uphill and thankless task to perform of any Church of England divine settled in New Zealand. Very probably those New Zealand colonists who admire conscientiousness and
The Last Thirty Years
108
quiet, undaunted courage have felt secretly pleased that this prize of position should have fallen in the end to Dr Nevill, of Dunedin. In his capacity to toil continuously up the steep without faltering, he recalls the lines of Christina Rosetti;—
“ And does the road wind uphill all the way ?”
“ Yes, to the very end.
“ Will the day's journey take the whole long day?”
“ From morn to night, my friend
Bishop Nevill was not only set to labour in a community where tne strength of wealth and numbers was overwhelmingly against the Church he represented, but he had for many years to contend against totally undeserved unpopularity and disaffection among his own flock. Vvith the calculating it used to be a matter of interested speculation how long Dr Nevill would endure unmoved the ceaseless warfare and the petty enmities which used to wound him in the house of his friends. Fortitude, however, conquers. The Bishop seems to have subdued antagonism in the best possible way—by outlasting it.
Not very long after my election to the Primacy I was called upon to bear the great loss of separation from the beloved companionship of the sharer of my life and journeyings of many years. My dear wife had, by the holiness of her life and beauty of her character, won the admiration and love of the whole community, and my large house was desolate indeed. About a year after this it became necessary for me to visit England to defend myself against a law suit which was brought against me greatly to my surprise and in a claim which I was convinced was fraudulent. This costly and distressing business was carried from court to court until at length a decision was given in my favour by the House of Lords. The tedious business, however, involved a lengthy stay in England, and before my return I married a daughter of the Rev. Geoffrey Fynes-Clinton in the parish Church of Blandford, of which her uncle, the Rev. Charles Fynes-Clinton, was the vicar.
Resuming my work early in 1906, I secured certain land in Stewart Island, in addition to the site of the church which I had previously purchased, and on which I had built a commodious wooden Church. I placed the Rev. H. B. Goertz, who had formerly been a sailor, in charge of the island, and supplied him with a motor boat, for the building of which I had collected a considerable sum of money. This was in order that Mr Goertz might occasionally visit Ruapuke, the scene of the former labours of Mr Wohlers, of whom I have spoken in the early part of this history.
On one occasion I myself accompanied Mr Goertz in this little vessel on a visit to the northern bays of the island, and visited each of the settlers then living there.
In the years 1906 and 1907 a very remarkable series of meetings were held between delegates of the Anglican Church and the Presbyterians in Australia under the Presidency of Archbishop Lowther
104
The Last Thirty Years.
Clarke, by means of which a scheme was drawn up for the consummation of an organic union between the Churches thus represented. The Archbishop did me the honour of asking my opinion upon the very important points upon which agreement was found to be necessary, and nothing was more wonderful than the closeness of the agreement arrived at on such fundamental principles as the grace of the Sacraments and Holy Orders. The conclusions of this body of delegates were subsequently submitted to a conference of members of both Churches, and found acceptance there, so that a mode for the actual consummation of the proposed union was drawn up, but not put into execution, as the Archbishop and Anglicans generally desired to have the expressed opinion of the Lambeth Conference at its next meeting, and there is little doubt that the remarkable utterances of the Lambeth Conference of 1920 were largely influenced by the conclusions arrived at in Australia. In my Synod addresses of 1907 and 1908 I drew attention to this very important matter and expounded the plans proposed.
The General Synod of 1919 was the twenty-first Session of that governing body of the Church in New Zealand, and as only one Session had been held at the time of my arrival in New Zealand since the Session of 1865, at which the Constitution has been finally revised and adopted, I felt myself to be the connecting link between the Church of to-day and her fathers in the past, and this feeling was the stronger from the fact that one intermediate Session was the last one over which Bishop Selwyn had presided. As I had already given notice to the “Senior Bishop” of my intention to resign the Primacy, it was natural that my opening address to the members of this Synod should partake a valedictory character, and the day upon which I actually vacated the Presidential Chair was the eve of my eighty-second birthday—the 12th day of May—and the seventh of the Session of the Synod. The Bishop of Nelson, who had visited Europe in order to visit and encourage our Chaplains to the New Zealand forces engaged in the war, returned during the Session of the Synod, and I was able not only 7 to welcome him on his arrival, but also to confer, in the presence of the Synod, the complimentary degree which had been granted to him by the Archbishop of Canterbury. The degree was that of a Doctor in Divinity, and the acknowledgment of authority 7 resident in the Archbishop to grant degrees is a remaining illustration of the forgotten fact that since rewards of literary or scientific attainments proceeded originally from the Church in proof of her encouragement of all knowledge.
I had received a commission from the Archbishop to represent him in this matter. One of the most interesting and important incidents of the Session was the confirmation by the Synod of the nomination of the Rev. F. M. Steward to be Bishop of Melanesia, a position to which he had been unanimously called by the members of the mission amongst whom he had laboured faithfully 7 for so many years. The removal of the centre of the mission from Norfolk Island
The Last Thirty Years
110
to the Solomons, and other circumstances, led the New Zealand Bishops, in common with myself, to feel that the time had come for a movement pointing to the development of the mission to a more organic condition as an independent Province of the Pacific Islands. The Bishop of Christchurch, as “ Senior Bishop,” presided as Acting Primate for the remainder of the Session, and at the close of it presented to me, in the name of the Church at large, a warmly-worded address in recognition of such services as I had been able to render in the capacity of Primate for about 17 years. This was still half a year before the resignation of my Diocese was to take effect, and on my return to Dunedin I set myself to a final visit of every part of it, and to the holding of confirmations in every church and district in which candidates had been prepared. I held m 3' last Diocesan Synod on June 8, following the meeting of the General Synod, it being Whitsun week, and shortly afterwards—viz., on St. John the Baptist’s Da>' —addressed a very large gathering in the Cathedral, which included the members of St. John Ambulance Association, the workers in the Red Cross Society and the Patriotic Association, and on subsequent occasions the returned nurses and medical officers who had been engaged in the war, and the returned soldiers generally. The last of the churches built during my episcopate was the little stone church at Ngapara, the result of efforts put forth by the Rev. V. W. Willis, and dedicated under the name of St. Mary b}' me on December 18, and my farewell sermon was delivered in the Cathedral in the evening of the Sunday after Christmas Day—the 28th inst.
As there had been a special Session of the Diocesan Synod held in October for the election of my successor, I was able in this last address to commend to the prayers and sympathetic support of church people the Yen. Archdeacon Richards, then the Bishop-elect, and I spoke of the time as the opening of a new era; an era of consolidation and of completion of enterprise begun in the pioneer stages which had fallen to my lot. I had also to address a gathering of the public which filled the Art Gallery, and was presided over by Sir George Fenwick, at which Sir George was pleased to speak in highly appreciative terms of my work, and presented me with an illuminated address, contained in book form, together with a well-filled purse.
In the closing words of this history of my life-work as the founder of a new Diocese I may say that it was never absent from my mind that I was a pioneer, and that I could look for no pecuniary or earthly reward for my labours. I had accepted the work moved by the fact that it was presented to me as a sort of forlorn hope. At the same time no small part of my joy in the work itself arose from the feeling that each little church I was able to plant within the wide area of my Diocese was a new centre of Divine worship where there had been none before. It was in such instances the tilling of a virgin soil, though in the more established towns the Presbyterians and the Anglo-Catholic Churches were already side by side. In piercing the interior of the country I naturally followed up the large river valleys
111
The Last Thirty Year
of the Molyneux or Clutha, and the Oreti, and at the close of my career I had just begun on the great Waiau River, having received from Mr Horrell, of Tuataupere, the gift of a valuable section, or rather two sections, as the site of a church and vicarage. Mr Horrell is a member of a devoted church family who have assisted much in the establishment of the Church in other parts of the Diocese, and his gift was valued at about £2OO by another resident in Tuataupere. It was at this point near the mouth of the Waiau that I left off. It will, no doubt, be possible for my successors to plant churches up the valley of the Waiau and along the shores of the great lakes of Manipouri and Te Anau, as the population, which is ever moving westward, makes such a design possible. And now I have laid down my crozier, and also my pastoral staff, and I am sometimes asked why I have done so, since even in my eighty-fourth year I am not disabled either in body or mind from a reasonable amount of work. My answer, however, is that, highly as I appreciate the kindness of those who express their sincere regret at the breach of our so long-continued relation as pastor and people, I am so strongly convinced that it is well for the life of the Church that other gifts of mind and spirit should be brought to bear upon it that, having, at the end of my days, secured a residence for a Bishop, and, by the patient skill of the Diocesan Treasurer and the watchful care of the Trustees, built up a modest income for a successor, I can lay down my charge in the same spirit which led to my acceptance of it, from my heart exclaiming, Gratias tibi Domine!
BISHOP NEVILL’S RETIREMENT.
The retirement of Bishop Nevill from the See of Dunedin in the forty-ninth year of his episcopate marks the close of a distinct period in the history of the Anglican Church in Otago and Southland, as well as in the general life of the community'. The work of the Anglican Church in the period when Otago was a rural deanery of the diocese of Christchurch, and until the establishment of the diocese of Dunedin by the General Synod in 1869, under the interim administration of Bishop Harper, was full of difficulty and discouragement, due largely to paucity of numbers, inadequate resources, and lack of efficient organisation. This inefficiency of organisation was painfull)' revealed by the Jenner incident. In March, 1871, the Synod of the diocese of Dunedin elected the Rev. S. T. Nevill, M.A., Rector of Shelton, Staffordshire, to the bishopric of Dunedin, and on the 4th of June Dr. Nevill was consecrated Bishop in S. Paul’s Church, Dunedin. It was a happy choice on the part of the Synod. Dr. Nevill came to New Zealand personally recommended by his diocesan, Bishop Selwyn of Lichfield, as a suitable clergyman to fill the vacancy in the See of Wellington or in the new diocese of Dunedin. It is difficult to-day to realise the work of a pioneer Bishop in a district almost equal in area to Ireland. The diocese of Dunedin was merely a geographical expression. The Bishop had only a few clergy ministering to small groups of churchpeople scattered over a vast territory. To add to his anxieties he had later to face the financial discouragements incidental to the transition from a pastoral to an agricultural economy. What this involved was clearly expressed in a letter written by the Primate a few years ago;—
There was a lons' period of commercial depression which followed a short period of fictitious prosperity and inflated values. Misled by the apparently fair prospect of making money rapidly, undertakings were entered upon on borrowed capital and properties were bought at prices which could not be realised upon perhaps twenty years afterwards. The consequence of all this was a widespread desolation. My diocesan visitations w'ere in those days largely made on horseback, and in a journey of perhaps many hundred miles I had to look upon stations and homesteads at which I had formerly been hospitably received, whether their owners belonged to our communion or not. either closed altogether or left in charge of a’ shepherd. During those long, long years, diocesan management was a weariness indeed, and not the less so because it was so hard to keep up the courage even of our church-workers themselves. 1 am thankful to say that no organised charge within my own diocese was closed in that period, but it was manifestly impossible to subdivide districts and so to introduce additional cltergy. Little else could be thought of than holding on.
Ihroughout his long episcopate Bishop Nevill has seen a gradual change not merely in external development, but in the advance of the community to a high standard of civilisation and character- He has seen
113
Bishop Nevill’s Retirement
steady growth in the national and provincial life of New Zealand, and, as Primate of the Anglican Church in this land, he has seen real progress not only in his own communion, but in the religious life of the Dominion.
The episcopate of Bishop Nevill links the church life to-day with the mission of the great pioneer Bishop of New Zealand, George Augustus Selwyn. It marks the transition from the work of the pioneer to the varied activities of the Bishop of a settled and growing diocese. The Primate’s life has been that of an idealist and a Christian statesman. He has had a high ideal of the Christian Church and has given the strength of a richly endowed personality to the task of setting before the people of Otago and Southland a true conception of the mission and work of the Anglican Church. He has lived the life of a Christian minister of earnest devotion and resolute purpose. It is to his credit that, in a community chiefly of Scottish descent and deeply rooted in the traditions of the Presbyterian Church, he has devoted his energies to the building up of his own people in the Anglican tradition; and it is no exaggeration to say that New Zealand is stronger to-day for the religious and public life of Otago and Southland which has been built up by men of strong convictions and sterling character, who owe much to the national traditions of England and Scotland both in religion and political principles. Among these men Bishop Nevill takes a high place as a Christian leader and a true colonist. The Bishop has been a man of high ideals, and he has been spared to see many of these realised in his exceptionally long episcopate. We would instance four that he has pleaded for in season and out of season. He saw from the first that the Church in New Zealand could only be built up by a ministry largely recruited from its own sons. In Selwyn College he established a theological seminary and a hall of residence for students attending lectures in the different faculties of the University of Otago. The policy which he adopted in this respect has been followed in every part of the Empire. It has been justified here in Dunedin as a university centre by the rapid growth of residential intsitutions. The expansion of Knox College, S. Margaret’s College, and Studholme House is a witness to the clearness of the Bishop’s insight. It is only a question of time when the policy of establishing residential hostels at universities and high schools will be accepted as part of the work of any effective religious denomination. It was no accident, also, that Bishop Nevill was the first to invite the Sisters of the Church to begin a school of a religious type in New Zealand. It was a true instinct in education that led him to believe that a few schools like S. Hilda’s Collegiate School for Girls in Dunedin would be in no sense a rival to the national system of education in New Zealand, but would help to keep alive in the community the conviction that religious and moral training is of essential value in a true system of education. In addition to education he had shown by the early establishment of S. Mary’s Orphanage for Girls how deeply he realised the need of the Church to touch one of the greatest problems in our social life. The extension of S. Mary’s Orphanage, the recent founding of the Memorial Home for Boys, the development of the mission work associated with the activity of the Rev. Vincent King—all afford proof of the depth of his sympathy with the social work of the Church.
Bishop Nevill’s Retirement
114
The great monument, however, of Dr. Nevill’s episcopate, apart from the spiritual work of his life, is the erection of the fisrt portion of the Cathedral in Dunedin. The Cathedral is not merely the outcome of years of devoted work on the part of the clergy and laity; it is largely the realisation of the Bishop’s vision of the unity of the diocese. He has had to face many disappointments, and has been exposed to criticism with regard to details, but the Cathedral itself, and the ideal of its government, testify to his resolute purpose and clear grasp of modern needs. Recent experience in Australia and New Zealand, as well as in other parts of the Anglican communion, has shown the wisdom of the course the Primate has taken in the establishment of the Cathedral. In a new country like New Zealand he wished the Cathedra 1 to be the mother-church of the diocese and to be associated with a capitular system adapted to modern needs. By a wise instinct he shrank from the erection of a mere parish church which might be used on certain occasions as a cathedral for diocesan functions. The long controversy between those who respectively adhered to these two different systems is passed. We can only hope that the ideal which inspired the two parties may be realised. The conception of the Cathedral that the Primate has expressed in all his utterances has been that of a true leader of his Church. No greater duty lies before his fellow-churchmen than that to which he called them in his last official utterance on the last Sunday of the old year. He urged them to make the Cathedral the centre of a noble and dignified worship, and to associate with the Cathedral a body of clergy who, by their piety, devotion, learning, and service, should exercise a real power of influence in the higher life of the community.
On behalf of the people of Otago we congratulate Bishop Nevill on the great work he has accomplished in his long episcopate, and we can assure him that he carries into his retirement the reverence and esteem of the community for his earnest and noble life as a citizen, for his strenuous and devoted work as a religious teacher, and for the courage and loyalty he has shown in the discharge of the sacred duties and serious responsibilities of His high office.—(“Otago Daily Times.”)
THE LATE BISHOP NEVILL.
The Right Rev. Dr Samuel Tarratt Nevill, first Bishop of Dunedin, and Primate of New Zealand from 1904 to 1919, was born at Lenton, near Nottingham, on May 13, 1837, in the last year of the reign of William IV. He was the third son of Mr Jonathan Nevill, of the High Pavement, Nottingham, lace and hosiery warehouseman, of the then important London firm of J. B. Nevill, which afterwards became J. R. Morley. His family was one which had much to do with both Nottingham and Essex, for it was descended from a Hugh de Nevill, called the Lion, who held most of the then town of Nottingham, was a benefactor of Lenton Abbey, and probably the donor of the original font from which the cathedral one is copied. This family was also settled in and round Ipswich, in Suffolk. The late Bishop took up for a time his father’s business, but eventually, feeling a strong call to holy orders, entered St. Aidan’s College, near Birkenhead, and in iB6O was offered the curacy of Scarisbrick, Lancashire, where he remained for some years. During that time he married Mary Susan Cook Penny, the daughter of Mr James Penny, merchant, of Heavitree, near Exeter, and a year later became rector of Shelton, Staffordshire, where he found a church in ruins and a parish in a most deplorable state of neglect, without Sunday schools or organisations of any sort, and where the people were sunk in the utmost moral degradation. During his tenancy of the living he effected the most remarkable change in the parish. He repaired the church, filled it with a big congregation, where half a dozen had been the usual thing, and altered everything for the better. While at Shelton, where he had four curates working under him, he went to Magdalene College, Cambridge, where he took his B.A. in second-class honours in the Natural Science Tripos in 1865, and his M.A. in 1868. He was given by Cambridge University the degree of D.D. honoris causa in 1871, on his election as first Bishop of Dunedin, and in 1906 was made an Honorary Fellow of Magdalene College, and his arms, “ three bustards gold on a blue field,” were emblazoned in the College windows. In the same year he was created the Sub-prelate of the Order of the Hospital of St. John of Jerusalem. From 1904 to 1919 he was Primate of New Zealand, as well as Bishop of Dunedin. He was the author of many pamphlets on burning questions of the day, and also a work entitled “Spiritual Philosophy,” published 11 years ago. In 1919 he resigned the See and Primacy, and devoted his retiring years to literature.
The late Dr Nevill had the great privilege and distinction of coming to Dunedin as its first Bishop, and finding there a great field for his active and energetic nature. Of Church organisation there was scarcely anything when he arrived. The Anglican communion was small, poor, and in want of all Church requisites. In 1863 the Rev.
The Late Bishop Nevili
116
E. G. Edwards nad been appointed as the first curate of St. Paul’s Church, Dunedin. St. Paul’s parish then extended from the Clutha to Palmerston. Bishop Nevill, who had George Augustus Selwyn, Bishop of New Zealand, and later Bishop of Lichfield, as his English Father in God, was recommended by Bishop Selwyn to the New Zealand clergy for the Bishopric of Wellington, but this arrangement did not come to anything, as Archdeacon Hadfteld was appointed to Wellington, and eventually Mr Nevill was elected Bishop of Dunedin. At his first coming the See had no cathedral, no Bishop’s house, no income for a Bishop, and the Diocese was simply part of Christchurch. In his earlier journeys the Bishop rode over most of Otago, penetrating wherever there were roads and seeking out all the centres of church life in the Diocese. As it was practically impossible to secure sufficient funds to establish things the Bishop travelled Home, and by strenuous journeyings and preaching;s secured enough money to substantially help Diocesan institutions. His mind was of the true statesman’s order, which not only saw the needs of the day, but the possibilities of the future; and so it was that he outlined the cathedral from the Church of St. Paul’ s —an outline which has reached so solid a reality in our own day. His ideals have also realised themselves in an excellent Church school for girls (St. Hilda’s College), Selwyn College for theological students, and St. Mary’s Orphanage for girls. Of this last the first Mrs Nevill was the real foundress, the orphanage being built behind Bishopsgrove and placed under Miss Cox, the first matron, from its inception it grew and flourished, and is now one of the recognised Diocesan institutions. St. Hilda’s, in the same way, had grown and prospered. Selwyn College, under the able wardenship of the Rev. A. Neild, Archdeacon Woodthorpe, and the present Bishop Rchards, has sent out many priests, who have done faithful work in New Zealand and elsewhere.
The time of the late Bishop’s episcopate—lB7l to 1919 —was for all the Church in New Zealand a time of construction. Bishop Nevill was perhaps the most distinguished of the men of his day in his grasp of the difficulties and problems of the young Church, and it is mainly owing to his wide grasp of its requirements that to-day there is very little left which requires a finishing hand. In England he was a friend of many distinguished men, the present Sir Oliver Lodge being one of his pupils; and his knowledge of the great prelates of the English Church ranged from Archbishop Longley to Dr Davidson. One of his greatest fights at the Lambeth Conference of 1878 was for the entire independence of the Church of New Zealand, There was at that time in England a strong movement to make the then Archbishop of Canterbury a kind of Anglican Pope; and this movement, which was aided by a number of time-serving clergy, was very near to success; but Bishop Nevill, by his resolute opposition, not only stopped the scheme, but also secured for himself a large number of lively enemies in the Conference, though he was strongly supported by such great Bishops as Christopher Wordsworth, Bishop of Lincoln at that time.
The Late Bishop Nevili
I I 2
Like many men of dominating personality, the late Bishop had friends as well as opponents, but time, edax rerum, has proved his ideas so often right that we may pay him the well-deserved tribute of a man who loved not only his Church, but his fellow-men, and conscientiously strove for what he felt to be the highest ideal of church life in his time.—“ Dunedin Star.”
Tribute by the Bishop of Dunedin.
On Sunday, November 6, at 3 p.m., there was a service of commemoration of the late Bishop Nevill. The sermon on the occasion was preached by Bishop Richards, who said: —“ We are gathered together here this afternoon to commemorate before God Samuel Tarratt Nevill, who for well nigh 50 years was Bishop of this Diocese, and for some 17 years held the position of Primate in our Provincial Church. It is somewhat difficult for us to-day to realise adequately all that his life has meant to the Church. In order to do so we must go back in thought to the condition of things at the time of his arrival in Dunedin. At that time the Church of New Zealand was putting forth her powers of freedom under the constitution which had been but lately secured to her by the master hand of Bishop Selwyn. Bishop Selwyn himself had returned to England, and the Church in New Zealand was organised into five Dioceses, of which that of Christchurch, including as it did Otago and Southland, was unwieldly and called for division. The need for this was increasingly manifest. Owing to the gold rush in the sixties settlement was proceeding rapidly, and it was impossible for a Bishop, whose headquarters were in Christchurch, to look after the needs of the Church in Otago. But the difficulties in the way of creating a new Diocese were great. The Canterbury pilgrims had made provision for the Church in the Canterbury block, and the Presbyterian pioneers had done the same for their Church in Otago and Southland. But so far as the Church of England was concerned nothing had been done here by way of endowment, and although the laymen of that time had responded to an appeal, they were not in a position to do much. And so it came to pass that while there were 10 clergy at work in widely separated cures, there was but little stipend for a Bishop, no Bishop’s house, and no means at hand for providing the bare necessities of Diocesan requirements.
This was the condition of things when the Rev. S. T. Nevill accepted nomination to the Bishopric and was consecrated the first Bishop of Dunedin in the year 1871. Why did he accept such a position? Why was he willing to resign his living at Home, to bid farewell to a beautiful church, as well as to the comfort and culture of life in England, in order to undertake a most difficult and in many ways discouraging work in comparative isolation at the Antipodes? In answer we can only suppose that he was actuated by the spirit of self-sacrifice, combined with the spirit of adventure in a great cause. For, surely , the cause was great! It was one of those formative
The Late Bishop Nevili
118
periods both in Church and State which have a tremendous effect in snaping the course of events in the future; when in secular life men not only make a home for themselves in a new land, but in a real and intensive way they also make history; and when in the Church it is essential to lay down broad lines of policy in such a way that the Kingdom of God shall bring its powers to bear in the best way upon the life and development of the nation.
The Church at Home, ministering for centuries to people in settled habitations, had become more or less stereotyped in her methods of working; in New Zealand she had to adapt herself to conditions entirely different. And the problem was not simply how to bring the means of grace to church people, at that time scattered throughout the country, but how to shape both the policy and the organisation of the Church so that it should proceed along the best lines, and should be an effective power in relation to the social well-being of the people. It is not too much to say that this was the ideal that the Bishop had in mind from the very first, and to this end he consecrated the great powers of mind and of soul that God had given him. It was not an easy task. It would not have been easy even under favourable conditions. And the conditions were far from being favourable. The physical strain alone was often great. He would be away from home for several weeks at a time, journeying in the saddle to remotest settlements. There was also the mental strain of one who was ever alert to keep abreast of the time and in touch with his surroundings; and there was the spiritual strain incident to his office. And then, in addition, all this was intensified because for years he was misunderstood. Perhaps the misunderstandings were mutual. But, however this may have been, they added to the difficulties; and one can understand how that more than once he must have been sorely tempted to return to England to positions which were offered him there.
It is no breach of confidence now to say, what he told others besides myself, that one thing which kept him at his post was the thought that God had given him a work to do here which he had not yet finished. Friends and inclination called him to England; a high sense of duty held him to Dunedin; and at length, after many years, the old difficulties vanished, and he had the satisfaction of securing the warm-hearted co-operation of clergy and laity, and of bringing to a successful issue the various objects of Diocesan organisation upon which he had set his heart. We have to-day a college which has already more than justified its existence; orphanages for both boys and girls, a girls’ college, the pioneer of really excellent church secondary schools for girls throughout the Dominion; a Bishop’s residence, a beautiful cathedral, and a cathedral organisation complete. These are some of the outstanding features of church equipment which we are already beginning to look upon almost as matters of course. We should remember that they are due almost entirely to the vision, the ability, the courage, the indomitable will of our first Bishop. And we are met here to-day to acknowledge this and to thank God for the example of faith and of good works which he has left us.
The Late Bishop Nevill.
1 H
Not that his energies were exhausted in his own Diocese. His sympathies were provincial and they were world-wide. With a statesman’s mind, he formulated long ago a scheme for co-ordinating the activities of the various missionary societies in New Zealand and in England, and he submitted proposals for reorganising the whole of the missionary work in the Pacific. In matters relating to church reunion he entered into correspondence with the Archbishop of Upsala, and got into touch with the teachers of the Old Catholic movement, and with the Orthodox Church of the East. While outside the strictly ecclesiastical sphere he turned his attention to great social questions of the day, and gave singularly clear, broad-minded utterances concerning prohibition, labour problems, and even the political situation in Western Europe. Nothing seemed too great for his keen and vigorous intellect, nothing too small for his generous care.
And now he is gone we feel that we have lost one who was at once the courtly citizen, the far-seeing organiser, the devoted churchman, the kindly friend, and yet he is not really lost to us. We are reminded in the teaching of this season of All Saints’ that in Christ we are linked together in a living union which is not dissolved by death. We are even now come unto Mount Zion and unto the City of the Living God the Heavenly Jerusalem, and to an innumerable company of angels .... and to the spirits of just men made perfect. In the realisation of this truth we thank God for our brother—for his devotion, for his self-sacrificing life. We remember him in our prayers, as no doubt he remembers us in his. And will not the most fitting appreciation of his life be this: That by the grace of God we unite heartily to carry on the work as Samuel Tarratt Nevill began it, and to develop still further those great projects which he had at heart for the glory of God and for the upbuilding of His Holy Church?
Bishop Averill’s Eulogium.
' In his address at the memorial service to the late Bishop Nevill, held at St. Mark’s Cathedral, Auckland, on November I, Bishop Averill said it was incongruous to speak of “ mourning ” for the late Primate, for God has given to him a span of life over and above that allotted to men, and an episcopate of duration rarely equalled, and which few men had surpassed. Bishop Nevill had used his life to the full. It had fallen to his lot to make a Diocese, to organise it, and by arousing much generosity, to equip it with institutions. In the Diocese of Dunedin there stood Selwyn College, St. Hilda’s College, the See House, and last, but not the least, the stately Cathedral, as lasting memorials to the late Bishop. It was a record of which any man might be proud. In addition to his episcopate of 50 years, Bishop Nevill had borne the additional burden of the Primacy of the Church in this province, a position to which he was appointed by the General Synod when it last met in Auckland. The remarkable knowledge which the late Primate possessed of the problems of the whole Anglican
The Late Bishop Nevili
120
Church, and especially of the needs of the islands of the Pacific, fitted him for the leadership of this province, and he had striven to uphold the honour and dignity of the position. Bishop Averill mentioned two points of special interest. It was the late Primate who was really responsible for the establishment of the Anglican Board of Missions in New Zealand. Secondly, the late Primate had constantly advocated the reunion of the Churches, and since his resignation it was his lastbit of work. He compiled a pamphlet, summarising in masterly fashion the steps by which reunion had become a real and pressing problem. The Bishop concluded with a touching tribute to the personal qualities of Bishop Nevill, his kindness of heart, his courteous bearing, his charm whether as priest or host, his unstinted generosity, and the simplicity of his domestic life and relationship. “He has passed,” he said, “ to the rest that remaineth after a life of struggle, and we are thankful that his grave will be in the country for which he did so much.”
Presbyterian Appreciation.
At the meeting of the Dunedin Presbytery on November I, the following motion was proposed by the Rev. Dr Cameron: —“ The Presbytery of Dunedin desires to place on record its appreciation of the long and faithful services rendered to the Church of Christ by the late Bishop Nevill. Fifty years ago he came to Dunedin in the strength of his early manhood, and was then consecrated the first Anglican Bishop of this Diocese. The story of these long years is one of earnest endeavour for the extension of the Church he loved so well and the good of all. In the advancing of his own views Bishop Nevill was strong and fearless, yet gracious to those who differed from him. His words never left the sting of bitterness in the hearts of those whom he opposed. He was a man of vision, who refused to be turned aside by difficulties or indifference from the pursuit of the causes to which he felt himself called. Thus, when others thought a college unnecessary, he set himself to found Selwyn College for the training of the clergy; and when to others a cathedral seemed but a dream, he saw it as a necessity and secured its sanction. The Presbytery desires to express its heartfelt sympathy with Mrs Nevill in her great loss, also with the members of clergy of our sister Church in their bereavement, and commends each to the grace of God our Father, the Giver of all good.”—The motion was carried, members of the Presbytery standing in silence.
Burial at Warrington.
The funeral of the late Bishop Nevill took place at Warrington on November I, a day of shower and sunshine, when the elements themselves seemed to reflect the emotions of sorrow and hope to which such an occasion gives rise. Throughout the ceremonial was
121
The Late Bishop Nevill
simple and impressive, and was marked by a sincere spirit of mourning for the prelate who, “ full of years and of honour,” was laid in his last resting-place,
Where in the listening stillness he can hear
. . . . the long, low sigh
Of supreme peace that whispers to the hills
The sacred consolation of the sea.
The late Bishop was deeply attached to Warrington, and it was in obedience to his own express wish that he was buried there.
The first service of the day was the celebration of Holy Communion in St. Paul’s Cathedral at 7.15 a.m. The large attendance was an eloquent tribute to the esteem in which the deceased Bishop was held by his people. Communicants were present representing all parts of his late Diocese, and the attendance also included representatives of the various other denominations, who came to join in mourning the loss which the Anglican community has suffered. The service was taken by the Bishop of Dunedin, assisted by the Rev. V. G. Bryan King, and special prayers in memory of the deceased Bishop were included. Bishop Julius, of Christchurch, the Acting Primate, was among those present.
The Funeral Procession.
Prior to the termination of this service a heavy shower of rain fell, and, as a consequence, the clergy who had intended to march in procession through the streets, did not don their surplices. As 9 o’clocs struck the Cathedral bell commenced to toll, and a few moments later the wreath-enveloped coffin was borne down the steps to the hearse waiting below. The passage of the funeral procession down Stuart Street to the railway station was watched by a large number of people and many of the business premises remained with closed doors as the cortege went slowly by. At the station the coffin was transferred to the special train which had been engaged to take the mourners to Warrington.
Canon Nevill, the late Bishop’s nephew, was chief mourner. The pall-bearers at the Cathedral, and also at the station, were Messrs F. O. Bridgeman, D. M. Spedding, W. T. Talboys, A. A. Finch, A. Goodley, A. H. Allen, R. J. Barrett, and F. S. T. Little. Mr R. C. T. Evans marshalled and directed the pall-bearers at both places.
Services at Warrington.
The journey to Warrington was made by nearly 100 persons, many having been deterred by the weather. Included in the party were a large number of clergy, together with many prominent churchmen, as well as the representatives of several of the other denominations. At Warrington the conditions were similar to those which had
The Late Bishop Nevili
122
prevailed in Dunedin, and during the progress of the service there were cold showers of rain and snow. Here, in a picturesque, rural cemetery, with the sea in front and the hills rising at the back, the mortal remains of the late Bishop were interred by the side of those of his first wife, which rest in a grave overhung by the branches of a noble oak tree and in close proximity to the little chapel enclosed by the cemetery grounds. In these surroundings and with the mourners grouped around the open grave—the surpliced clergj' adding to the effectiveness of the scene—Bishop Julius pronounced the beautiful service for the dead of the Church of England. The benediction was pronounced bv Bishop Richards.
Then followed a short but impressive Masonic service, the late Bishop having been a Past Provincial Grand Chaplain of the Order. The service was conducted by M.W. Bro. T. Ross, R.W. Bro. J. Skottowe Webb, R.W. Bro. H. O. Carter, and V.W. Bro. T, W. Dobbie, with Bros. Uphill and Bush King assisting. At the close of the ceremonial the lamb’s skin and sprig of acacia, emblems of Masonry, were deposited in the grave. These proceedings were directed by Bro. Lischner.
The pall-bearers from the train to the cemetery were Messrs A. Goodley, A. H. Allen, A. A. Finch, R. C. T. Evans, and four Masons— Bros, J. Skottowe Webb, R.W. (Eng.), T. Ross, M.W. (N.Z.), H. C. Carter, R.W. (Scot.), and T. W. Dobbie, V.W. (Irish).
At the close of the service numerous wreaths were laid on the grave. The mourners rejoined the train at 11.30 a.m., and reached town about an. hour later.
The Vigil.
During Tuesday night a vigil was maintained by the sisters of St. Hilda’s Collegiate School and the Cathedral verger (Mr P. Erridge). The casket lay in the centre of the sanctuary, before the altar. It was made of solid oak, with raised lid and mountings of copper and silver and an engraved name-plate. The body was laid in the Bishop’s robes.
S.Pauf's Eathedraf Ebureh, Dunedin.
Early History.
( Some four years before the arrival of the "John Wickliffe” and the “Philip Laing” Bishop Selwyn paid his first visit to the South Island of New Zealand. The Bishop’s life and work are so well known that it is hardly necessary to say more than that he was consecrated October 17, 1841, in Lambeth Palace Chapel. On this visit he came as far as Akaroa in the “Richmond,” a miserable schooner of 20 tons. He visited the Natives at Timaru, at Waitaki River, Moeraki, and Waikouaiti, where he stayed at the house of Mr. Watkin, the Wesleyan missionary! and catechised his converts. Finally he penetrated as far as Foveaux Straits. The next recorded visit of Bishop Selwyn was on June 14, 1848, when he stayed two or three days (in Dunedin), and was well received by the newly-arrived immigrants. Apparently, to judge by the original Register of S. Paul’s, the Rev. J. A. Fenton took his' first baptisms on February Ist, 1852, in Dunedin, the first 25 entries in the Register dating from 1855. The fact, however, that they stand as O. 25 and the 1852 entry as O. 26 makes it plain that they'have either been copied from some earlier record, or put down by Mr. Fenton later. Fourteen entries are those of people confirmed by the first Bishop of New Zealand, and mostly baptised in various places in the Old Country. The first six entries are of those actually baptised by the Bishop in 1855 at Goodwood and Matainaiga (sic). One person alone has the distinction of being baptised by the martyr Bishop, John Coleridge Patteson, at Port Chalmers on November 25, 1855; and his parents, Henry Stratford and Violetta Ridley, lived at Portobello Bay. Of the earlier entries Charles Eberhard and Mary Emma Suisted lived at Teaka 1 upu, Goodwood, as did Samuel and Maria Woolley and Michael and Margaret Green; Thomas and Sarah Sophia Knewstubb, at Matainaiga; Alexander and Elizabeth Milne, Dunedin; John Dewe, Dunedin; Charles and Ellen Logie, Dunedin; Henry Frederick and Sarah Mercy Blatch, Dunedin; Benjamin and Bridgett Dawson, Dunedin; Andrew and Matilda Baker, Dunedin; James Stuart and Eleanor Jones Shanks, Dunedin; James and Mary Low, Dunedin; John and Rebecca Goodall, Dunedin; John and Elizabeth Finch, Dunedin ; James and Elizabeth Agnes Boniface, North-East Valley; George Lewis and Harriet Kedie Fleury, North-East Valle}’. 1852 and onwards:—George and Elizabeth Ann Lloyd, Green Island; John and Emma Sutton, Dunedin; Robert and 'Margaret Steward, Dunedin; William and Mary Mosley, Halfway Bush; Alfred and Emily Chetham-Strode, Dunedin; Robert and Sarah Williams, Dunedin; Archibald and Janet Macdonald, Dunedin ; James and Mary Mayo, Dunedin; Peter and Mary Williams, Port Chalmers; Edwin and Beatrice Palmer, Taieri Village (later Moeraki Bush); Robert and Jane Brown, Taieri Village; Thomas and Jane Stuart, Port Chalmers; John and Rebecca Goodall, Caversham ; George and Susan Steel, North-East Valley; William and Elizabeth Buswell Meredon, North Molvneux;
S. Paul’s Cathedral Church, Dunedin
124
Thomas and Jane Trumble (child baptised by Rev. H, G. Johnston, locality not given); James and Sarah Gillow, Waihola (and Waihola Park in later entries); Edwin and Sarah Palmer, Hissenskoe (?) Bush. 1853: —James and Isabella Henry, Dunedin; William and Sarah Ann Black, Tokomairiro; James Houston and Jessie Nielson Stirling, Dunedin; George and Helen Dawson, Green Island ; Henry and Ellen Penelope Jefferys, Caversham ; Peter and Eliza Crew, Dunedin ; Thomas Samuel and Isabella Watson, Dunedin; James and Elizabeth Crane, Taieri Village; Frederick Daniel and Rosannah Sarah Basire, Port Chalmers; Thomas John and Lillie Augusta Drummond White, Dunedin; James and Catherine Henrietta Elliot Fulton, Dunedin and West Taieri; Hugh and Laura Thomas, Dunedin; Richard and Elizabeth Sizemore, Waikouaiti; James and Mary Hood, Waikouaiti; Thomas and Elizabeth Lysher, Pleasant River, Waikouaiti; Henry Charles and Fanny Hertslet, Hawksbury; John and Elizabeth Lovell, Sawyer’s Bay; William and Mary Alcock (by Rev. H. G. Johnston; no locality given; Mr. Johnston seems to have ministered in the Taieri); John and Marion Nicolson, Dunedin; John and Jane Powley, Caversham Rise. 1854: — Robert and Elizabeth Twelftree, Dunedin ; Henry Angel and Eliza Ann Foster, Dunedin ; Samuel and Sarah Gibbs, Breadalbane, West Taieri; Francis and Mary Hare, Dunedin; Andrew and Matilda Baker, Dunedin ; Thomas and Eliza Richardson, Dunedin; Henry Frederick and Isabella Hardy, Dunedin ; Edward Bland and Amelia Julia Atkinson, of Otepopo, Moeraki. 1856: —Charles Edward and Jane Smith, Anderson’s Bay; John and Marion Nicolson, Pelichet Bay; William Sackett and Sarah Elizabeth Jarman, Dunedin; Robert and Madaline Robertson, Caversham; Alonso and Alice Morris, Tokomairiro; Frederick and Alison Ludlow, Breadalbane; Henry James and Bessie Frances Mackinnon, Dunedin; Joseph and Susannah Millshead, Dunedin; Thomas and Sarah Bndgeman, Tokomairiro; John and Ann Helen Hardy, Tokomairiro; Richard Leslie and Ann Flora Jeffreys, North-East Valley ; Lein and Alicia Haughton, Halfway Bush; William Gordon and Mana Stuart Rich, Molyneux; John and Maria Petchell, Molyneux; Andrew and Matilda Baker, Upper Harbour, West Side; William and Louisa lies, Dunedin; Thomas and Jane Trumble, Kun Bush; John and Ellen Manning, Sawyer’s Bay; Henry and Margaret Swallow, Dunedin; Thomas John Tudor and Flora Clementina Williams, Tokomairiro. 1857 James and Elizabeth Isted, Green Island Bush; Thomas and Jessie Grundy, Green Island Bush; James and Mary Clifford, Invercargill and Port Chalmers ; Thomas and Ann Ovington, Kaihiku, Molyneux; John de la Condamine and Harriet Carnegie, Dunedin; Angus and Mary Cameron, Popokaio ; - Ashmore, Moeraki Bush, Taieri; Frederick and Mary Coxhead, Alma Cottage, near Dunedin; John and Emily Brooks, Nelson; Thomas Augustus and Elizabeth Cargill, Dunedin. The Registers are interesting as they show that marriages and baptisms were celebrated anywhere convenient —e.g., in the house of W. H. Valpy, Esq.; in the Forbury Stonehenge House (January, 1852); in the house of Robert Williams, Esq.; in the house of Donald Ross, Dunedin; in the house of John Orbell, Esq., Hawksbury; in the Court House, Dunedin; Taieri Village, Otago; Tokomairiro; in Mr. Street’s house, Green Island Bush; in the house of Mrs. Gibson, Silverstream, West Taieri; Taomai, Waikouaiti; and on September 12, 1855, in the temporary church, Dunedin; in the house of Thomas Trumble, Kuri Bush; in the house of John Powley, Caversham; in the house of F. P. Pillans, Esq., Molyneux Island.
S. Paul’s Cathedral Church, Dunedin
120
These entries have been selected to give some rough idea of the ground covered by the earliest Register. It seems to have included all the country up to Hawksbury and southwards to the Molyneux; how far west history does not say, but even Mr. Fenton and Mr. Johnston must have found their time fully occupied in attending to it. The names of the children baptised have not been given, as they naturally touch on the present generation. Mr. Fenton was sent to Dunedin by the Bishop to organise a church, arriving at Port Chalmers on January Ist, 1852, and conducting a service in the Courthouse on January 8, 1852. A meeting of members of the Church of England was held in the Courthouse on January 5, 1852, with Mr. Chetham-Strode in the chair, when the following gentlemen were present:—Messrs. A. R. Chetham-Strode, W. H. Valpy, C. H. Kettle, David Garrick, H. Robison, L. A. Berney, C. Smith, W. Filleul, G. A. Sutton, James Mayo, H. A. Foster, J. de la C. Carnegie-Longuet, George Smith, P. Crow, Hopkinson, Partridge, S. Woolley, Barr, McKain, W. Mosely, Willshead, Seed, and Drs. Williams and Richardson. The meeting appointed the following gentlemen a committee, with instructions to confine themselves to raising money for the maintenance of a clergyman : —Messrs. A. R. Chetham-Strode, C. Smith, H. Robison, Carnegie, Woolley, Mayo, Mosely, Sutton, and Dr. Richardson. Mr. Garrick was appointed hon. secretary and Dr. Richardson treasurer. The hon. secretary was instructed to write to the Governor-in-Council asking for the grant of a site for a church, school, and parsonage. The following were the trustees appointed:— Messrs. W. H. Valpy, A. R. Chetham-Strode, E. Lee, Sutton, and Drs. Williams and Richardson. It may here be mentioned that Dr. Richardson had, before coming to the colony, interested himself in the establishment of an Anglican Church in Otago, and had raised a sum of £3OO for the purpose, besides some church accessories. He also wrote to the proper authorities requesting the grant of a site for a church, but this was refused, and the correspondence was published in the “Otago Witness,” a strong leader appearing in the next issue commenting on the matter. A vote of thanks was passed to him at this the first meeting of churchmen for his great exertions in their behalf. It was then resolved unanimously—“ That an address to the Rev. J. A. Fenton be immediately proposed by the members of the Church, expressive of their gratitude for his voluntarily coming amongst them, where for the last three years his valuable services have been so much needed.”
At the first committee meeting it was reported that the sum of £B5 13s. 6d. had been collected, and Messrs. Pillans, Hertslet, Steele, and Lee were added to the committee, and the Bishop of New Zealand was made a trustee, Mr. A. R. Chetham-Strode being appointed minister’s churchwarden and Dr. F. Richardson people’s churchwarden. Mr. Fenton’s parish comprised at that time the whole of Otago, and he had on his committee representatives from such widely separated districts as the Clutha and Waikouaiti. On the 10th of March, 1852, the committee thanked the Rev. Mr. Creed for his visits to Dunedin and for his performance of the services of the Church during the period before the arrival of Mr. Fenton, and also sympathised with him on the manner in which he had been attacked by Captain Cargill for so doing.
S. Paul’s Cathedral Church, Dunedin
126
At this meeting a member was appointed to select a site for a church, and he recommended the Octagon. During the year the Rev. H. G. Johnston had been added to the committee of the church, and took an occasional service for Mr. Fenton. He subsequently took charge during Mr. Fenton’s absence on a holiday. Mr. Johnston was later Rector of Wivelscombe, Devon. There were stated to be 285 Anglicans and 1317 Presbyterians in February, 1853, and at the annual meeting on the 14th of March, 1853, it was resolved to instruct tne committee to take the necessary steps for the immediate erection of a church and to commence the building of the parsonage as soon as they shall have funds in hand for that purpose. This resolution led the committee, which met after the annual meeting to request an architect to submit a plan for the church, and to leave it to the architect’s discretion whether the windows brought from England by Dr. Richardson should be made available. On Monday, August 24, 1*853, it was resolved to purchase the house belonging to Mr. G. B. Atkinson for a parsonage, and certain alterations were authorised. A week later a futrher resolution was carried that a wooden church be erected, and tenders were called for it forthwith. The tenders were too high, and the plans were modified to provide for a plain oblong building about 50ft. by 22ft. 6in. The Governor had granted the Octagon, then known as Moray Place Reserve, as a site for the church, and it was resolved to fence it in; but there was such an uproar about the proposed grant by those who were not members of the church that it was not confirmed. After an unseemly wrangle over the alleged misappropriation of money which had been subscribed for a definite object to a purpose for which it was not intended, the project of building a church was abandoned; and on the 20th of March, 1855, it was resolved to purchase the property on which the Courthouse now stands and buildings attached with the church funds at the committee’s disposal, on the terms offered by Mr. David Ross. This was accordingly done, the building being first fitted up as a church and then subsequently enlarged. The Courthouse stood on the section now occupied by the Hardware Company’s block of buildings and part of Cumberland Street. The Courthouse building served until a part of the present building was erected and made fit for occupation.
Mr. Fenton’s parish, as has been said, at first included practically the whole of Otago, and at times its wide extent caused great inconvenience, as, for instance, on one occasion, when Bishop Selwyn arrived unexpectedly and wished to hold a confirmation. This was impossible, as the first knowledge Mr. Fenton had of the Bishop’s arrival was when he met him in the church already robed, and it would have taken days to communicate with his parishioners interested in the confirmation. Bishop Harper was appointed to Christchurch in 1856, and paid his first visit to Otago in 1857. I might add that in S. Paul’s original Register Bishop Selwyn held a confirmation in Dunedin on November 23, 1855.
In 1858 Mr. Fenton intimated his intention of resigning on account of failing health, but refused a proposed presentation from his congregation, advising them to devote all their energies to providing his successor with a parsonage in a more central position. Mr. Fenton’s temporary successor at S. Paul’s was the Rev. A, H. Wyatt, who took charge till the arrival of the Rev. E. G. Edwards.
S. Paul’s Cathedral Church, Dunedin
127
During the years 1859 and iB6O the committee of S. Paul’s Church had discussed the necessity for building a church of a more commodious size and in a more suitable position than the old Courthouse. At the first meeting, at which the Rev. E. G. Edwards presided, July 14, 1859, a motion had been carried affirming this necessity, but it was not until April 7, 1862, that the tender of Mr. Robert Given was accepted; and on Sunday, April 6, 1863, the church was consecrated by the Bishop of Christchurch The building was not complete, cloth being hung before most of the windows, but it was desired to open it on Easter Sunday, and, as the Bishop was in Dunedin, a postponement could not be made. Mr. W. Carr Young took a most active part in a canvass for subscriptions, and held himself responsible for meeting the calls of the contractors as the work progressed.
The New Cathedral.
The new Cathedral of S. Paul has grown out of the old parish church by natural evolution. It W'as the centre of the City; it was the mother church; and it became the Cathedral of the diocese.
It may be as well to record S. Paul’s history briefly. The first service held in Dunedin was on January 28, 1849, in the gaol, the only suitable building, and it was taken by the Rev. C. Creed, a Wesleyan missionary from Waikouaiti, and was to be continued every Sunday morning. Later on, service was held in a building about Gaol Street.
On June 3, 1862, the foundation stone of the old church was laid by the Bishop of Christchurch. The following were the names on the sheet of paper placed under the foundation stone Edward George Edwards, curate ; Alfred Chetham-Strode, William Carr Young, churchwardens ; Richard Seaward Cantrell, Henry Fred Hardy George Cook, Richard Bowden Martin, Fred Pantlin, vestrymen; Charles Abbott, architect; Robert Given, builder. The church w'as finally consecrated April 3, 1863, by Bishop Harper.
In 1877 a new wing was completed. In 1889 the spire, being unsafe, was taken down. In 1895 the church became the Cathedral Church of the diocese, and was dedicated as such January 18, 1895.
The date of the laying of the foundation stone of the new Cathedral was June 8, 1915. The ceremony, an impressive one, was attended by the Freemasons, choirs, clergy, members of the Chapter and New Cathedral Board, the Vicar (E. R. Nevill), the Dean (Yen. A. R. Fitchett), two Bishops (Auckland and Christchurch), and the Primate. The offertory from the Diocese was £372. In a cavity under the stone were placed copies of the “ Envoy,” the “ Evening Star” and the “Otago Daily Times,” and the Siocesan statutes, the proceedings of the last Synod, plans of the building, and two parchments. One of these was a copy of the document similarly placed m the foundation stone of the first S. Paul’s; the other contained the names of the present Cathedral authorities, the architects, and
S. Paul’s Cathedral Church, Dunedin
128
builders. The parchments were sealed in a special glass vessel given by Mr. Conn, and this and the papers were placed in a copper box presented by Messrs. J. Hall and Son. The stone itself, a fine block of Coromandel granite, presented by Messrs. H. S. Bingham and Co., bore the following inscription:—“A.M.D.G. The foundation stone of this Cathedral was laid by the Most Rev. S. T. Nevill, D.D., Bishop of Dunedin and Primate of New Zealand, on the Bth day of June, 1915 ; A. R. Fitchett being Dean, E. R. Nevill Vicar, J. J. Clark Mayor of Dunedin, G, Simpson and Co. builders, Sedding and Wheatley (F. and A.R.1.8.A.) architects, Basil B. Hoorer (A.R.1.8.A.) supervisory architect.”
At the social in the evening the Primate paid a special tribute to the generosity of the late Mr. William Harrop, through whose magnificent bequest of £20,000 the commencement of the Cathedral scheme was made possible.
During the building of the Cathedral by the contractor, Mr. W. Maclellan, the services were carried on in the schoolroom, which had been fitted up as a church. It proved a most comfortable building, and will have many associations connected with war services and intercessions for those who worshipped there. The Rev. E. R. Nevill was made Priest-vicar in 1915, and took the first services on Palm Sunday. Later on the vicariate was done away with, and Mr. Nevill was elected Canon of the Cathedral and appointed as Sub-dean. The Rev. C. H. Statham was also appointed to the Cathedral staff, and was most helpful both at the Cathedral and also with the Cathedral district churches. This bridged over the gap in the Cathedral history from 1914 to 1919.
Some account of the new building is now added to enable future historians of the Church in New Zealand to complete their account of S. Paul’s. First of all, the present temporary chancel is covered by the roof of the old nave, which has, unfortunately, been painted a cream colour inside instead of a dark wood tint. All the glass is that of old S. Paul’s. That on the north side is the Buchanan window. On the north-west side is the window to Ruth Mary Hall, the daughter of the late Archdeacon Edwards, with the Butterworth window. On the south-east side the Martin window comes first, then the two GrayRussell windows, one of two lights and one of a single light, given by Mr G. Gray-Russell in 1886; the Harrop window being over the altar.
The whole of the chancel fittings and choir stalls were made by Messrs. C. and W. Hayward from drawings by Mr. Basil Hooper, and are of figured rimu or red pine, the style chosen being Gothic, in keeping with the Cathedral itself. The rail on either side of the entrance to the chancel is in the form of four square pillars supporting arched beams with spandrils finely carved in bas-relief. Proceeding towards the sanctuary, one passes between the choir stalls, which are beautiful in design, the panelled screen fronts being of open tracery work, supported on turned pillars. There is a rich massiveness of effect in the haffits of both the stalls and the prayer desks, and both are freely and richly decorated with carving and sunk panelling. Each set of stalls provides accommodation for 26 boys and 24 men. On the left-hand side of the altar arc situated the four sedilia or priests’ stalls, the heavy
S. Paul’s Cathedral Church, Dunedin
124
ends and divisions of which are beautifully moulded. Over the back of each is a pointed canopy supported on pillars resting on the sides of the stalls. The credence table and the litany desk are designed to match the other furniture. On the right-hand side of the altar is the bishop’s throne, which was in use in the old Cathedral, and is quite in keeping with its surroundings. The altar, super-altar, and reredos, which were presented by the Masonic fraternity, were also made by Messrs. Hayward, and carved by Mr. Scott. The front and ends of the altar consist of traceried panels—therein the front and one in each end—finished with carved cusping. The panels are divided by carved Australian blackwood pilasters, and surmounted by heavy moulding richly carved. In the reredos the panelling of the super-altar is repeated with good effect. Above is a heavy coved moulding, relieved by four carved patteries on each side of the central canopy, which will have to undergo alteration later. This gift is worthy of the high traditions of Freemasonry. The timber is selected figured rimu, and one cannot help being struck by its beautiful finish and colour; it is impossible to imagine anything finer or more dignified than the furniture which has been described above. The Eucharistic candlesticks are the gift of the Girls’ Friendly Society, and have an inscription round the bases to thaf effect.
The bishop’s throne is inside the altar rails on the north side. On the north side are also the piscina and credence table. The new frontals on the altar have been designed with great taste by the Rev. H. O. Fenton, Vicar of Anderson’s Bay, and prepared by Messrs. Herbert, Haynes and Co. The beautiful altar linen was worked entirely by Mis E. Heywood, and is worthy of the church. Nurse Mills presented the credence table, with linen also. The altar rail is the old rail of S. Paul’s, which has been lengthened a little to fit its new position.
On the south side the first stained window in the nave is the Nicholls window, one of the best of the old windows. The next four windows (vacant at present) are composed of beautiful cathedral glass in shades of white, blue, and green. Then comes the Gould window, in memory of the late Archdeacon Gould, and last on this side is the Smith window, which was formerly in the old church, but by the Primate’s exertions has been turned into a four-light window, to suit its present surroundings, and the beautiful Statham window. On the north side the first window is a two-light one depicting S. Michael and S. George, given by Mrs Livingston in memory of her husband, who fell in the war. All the windows on the north side are empty of stained glass at present, as are the clerestory windows.
There are three doors in the nave —one opening to Stuart Street, the other to the north side, and the great door opening on to the Octagon, with its 82 marble steps. A handsome vestibule of red pine with decorated mouldings has been built to screen the Octagon door. In the centre of the nave the old seats are at present in use, while the two aisles are seated with chairs. Eventually it is intended that the whole church shall have chairs only. The finest window of all with regard to size and beauty of line is the great window over the Octagon. It would be a fitting memorial of the war for the Anglicans to fill it with stained glass.
S. Paul’s Cathedral Church, Dunedin
125
The vestries and choir rooms ire below the Cathedral, the choir room being fitted up for practice with seats, platform, and piano. Facing the bottom of the stairs are the clergy vestries, and next to the stairs is the bishop’s private robing room. There are other large rooms which will be adapted to various uses in the future. At the end is the engine room, offices, etc. For those desiring details an article in the "Evening Star” of November 16, 1918, will be helpful.
The following description of the building itself is taken from a paper read by Mr. Hooper before the Society of Architects of New Zealand “In considering the position of the site, the usual plan of building has been reversed. The conventional east is placed west, and west east. It was felt that the advantage and effect of having the main entrance, with its noble flight of steps, facing the Octagon was far too valuable to be lost for the sake of custom, however ancient. The gradual rise in the level of the site from front to back has necessitated a fairly high flight of steps; but the need has evolved a scheme that will undoubtedly be a unique feature of the front. The design adopted shows a main flight of steps, with two subsidiary flights at right angles, and separated by two pedestals. New Zealand white marble will be used for the steps. The plan of the finished Cathedral is all of the cruciform type, with fairly deep transepts, the choir forming the top of the cross and remaniing throughout the same width and height as the nave. There will be, therefore, no chancel in the ordinary sense of the word at all, and a range of double piers will run the whole distance from west to east, forming an ‘ambulatory’ sft. wide. This will be carried right round the east end, behind the altar. (All this is in future.) The Stuart Street door is two steps higher than the level of the footpath at that point, and will be the one usually in use. The interior of the Cathedral is specially interesting, as the whole is vaulted in stone throughout. The vaulting is very simple, being of the four-part type, but its effect is very imposing. The aisle vaulting is the same as the nave, the ribs of the vaulting being slightly heavier. The system of having double piers is rather interesting, as it utilises the two walls above as an abutment to the nave vaulting. The stability is increased by the barrel vaulting, and the flying buttresses take the rest of the thrust of the building. The triforium—that is, the long gallery between the nave and the clerestory windows—has a number of windows looking down on the nave, and, though it is only 7ft. to sft. high, still it can accommodate a number of people on special occasions, although the view from there will be limited, owing to the closeness of the mullions forming the arcade. The floor is concrete, and access is obtained by the two spiral staircases in the pinnacle towers. The material of the Cathedral is Gay’s stone. It was intended to use a stone called T.T. for the interior lining, but, as this entailed wasting the slabs obtained from the cuttings, it was found much cheaper to keep to the one stone. The heating system has been designed on the low-pressure hot water system. Radiators have been provided for under the aisle windows, in moulded recesses, and also in the triforium. These warm the air descending from the clerestory windows, and prevent a cold draught from coming down on the congregation. There are no radiators on the floor of the nave itself, but the air being warmed all round the walls and above should make the temperature of the whole building quite comfortable. The heating chamber is in the basement, and heats all
131
S. haul’s Cathedral Church, Dunedin
the rooms below as well as the Cathedral itself. “Ideal” radiators and boiler have been used throughout, and provision has been made for an “accelerator” to be installed or not, as desired. This apparatus is electrically driven, and is said to increase the flow of water in the pipes and to add to the efficiency of the system. I believe it is a new thing for New Zealand, and certainly for Dunedin. Altogether, the heating system of the Cathedral has been well thought out, and the result should prove a great comfort for the congregation. The lighting has been installed by Messrs. Turnbull and Jones, and is very striking, the illuminated Cathedral from outside being most effective. The chief feature of the lighting is the type of fitting for the nave and aisles. These consist of i6in. by iqin. Holoplane glass bowls, with massive bronze moulded rings, relieved with pierced quarterfoils, the whole measuring 26m. in diameter. The fittings are suspended by 12 chains meeting at a point from where the main chain takes the weight. These are hung from heavy wrought-iron brackets in the nave, fitted above the capitals of the main vaulting shafts, and in the aisles from the intersections of the vaulting ribs. The whole is in thorough harmony with the architecture of the Cathedral. The nave and aisle fittings are of the direct diffused type—that is, the lamps are concealed, but the light is diffused from the fitting itself. The great height of the nave ceiling and the shape of the vaulting makes it impossible to use reflected lighting, but there should be no trouble from glare, owing to the diffusive nature of the glass bowls. For the exterior handsome copper lanterns have been specially designed, one on each side and one over the main doors, hung from wrought-iron brackets.”
In conclusion, a few words as to the style adopted by the architects for the general design of the Cathedral may be in place. Beyond being Gothic, it is not possible to define it as being much more of one period than another, and, indeed, the main features are quite free and original. The mouldings are simple yet effective, and the window tracery is also most uncommon. It is refreshing to get away from the orthodox type, whether perpendicular or decorated, and in this case something new has certainly been evolved. There is an air of solidity and strength, and freedom from the numberless little cusps and spidery mullions that usually mark the orthodox designs. The balcony that is over the Octagon doors is quite unique and a feature of the front.
The pulpit is designed after the famous pulpit in Siena Cathedral, Italy. It is carried on eight columns of New Zealand greenstone, with capitals carved by Mr. Shank. The semi-circular stairway of ten steps is of O.K. Oamaru stone, which is very dense. The floor of the pulpit, elevated 6ft., is of rimu. Into the base of the steps on the side near the Stuart Street door is built a block of granite from lona Cathedral, sent by Lord Glasgow, with a suitable brass plate beneath it, and a tile from the monastry of S. Augustine’s, Canterbury, presented by Bishop Richards. The chairs are of seagrass, made in Dunedin. The new Litany desk is of figured rimu, and is a gift from a private donor. The pulpit, the panelling, and the piscina are the work of Mr. \V. McLellan, the contractor, who made a gift of the piscina to the Cathedral.
S. Paul’s Cathedral Church, Dunedin
132
The Harrop Window.
One of the provisions of the will of the late Mr William Harrop, who left a large sum of money to be devoted to the erection of the new Anglican Cathedral in Dunedin, was that a window to his memory should be placed in the Cathedral. In compliance with that condition the New Cathedral Board some time ago purchased five stained glass windows that were brought from England, and they have been set as a group in the end wall of the chancel, at the back of the altar. These windows, of Tudor-Gothic design, are said to belong to the period of Christopher Wren, and are supposed to have been recovered from some English church when it was being demolished. Whatever the origin, the windows are indubitably of high value as works of art, and as seen to-day, in position, almost ready for the unveiling ceremony on Sunday morning next, they strike the beholder as incomparable amongst Australasian possessions of a like nature.
By the arrangement adopted, the five windows are set side by side at an equal height, thus producing an imposing massed effect. The central window, n feet high, represents the Good Shepherd. To its right are the figures of St. Matthew and St. Mark; to its left the representations of St. Luke and St, John. These four flanking windows are about 9 feet high or a little more. Each of the figures stands about 5 feet 3 inches, being nearly or quite life size. Marvellous beauty characterises the whole group. The colouring is wonderfully rich, and of a quality rarely achieved in modern glass-staining, for there is plenty of body without any suggestion of opacity—that is to say, the light comes right through even the densest of the colour. The definition of the figures is also remarkable. Though well embellished by the surroundings, the accessories are in such strict subordination as to allow the Christ and the Evangelists to stand right out, instead of being clouded by or merged with the detail. Moreover, the representations possess individuality. Too often such figures have a family resemblance, or are so softened as to lose character. Such a fault does not exist in these windows. Looking at the Evangelists in the light of what is known about them historically, one can identify each. Again, the Evangelists are imaged as men, and thus there is an effective contrast with the Christ. Matthew, Mark, and Luke are bearded; John has a younger face and the characteristic expression of love. The work in the whole group is such as to command admiration and reverence. Underneath, just above the sill, and certainly not too prominent, is the inscription: “To the glory of God and in grateful memory of William Harrop, whose farseeing beneficence made possible the building of this Cathedral.”
Smith and Smith have placed the window in its place, and the necessary stone work has been done by Mr M'Lellan, who was the contractor for the building. In the readjustment of the chancel, so as to provide for the new window, the Butterworth window, the Buchanan window, and the Hall window are now placed in the north wall, faced by the Martin window and the old cathedral. The chancel is now very beautiful.
128
S. Paul’s Cathedral Church, Dunedin
History and Description of the Font in the Cathedral of S. Paul, Dunedin.
This font is a replica of the one formerly existing in the Priory Church of Lenton, near Nottingham. This Priory was enriched by the benefactions of Hugh Nevill, of Arnall, Notts, and Hallingbury, Essex, who, having been brought up in the family of King Henry 11, was personally attached to Richard I, and became his companion in the Crusade of 1185, and was afterwards King’s Treasurer and held other high offices. He was subsequently one of the signatories of Magna Charter. The Nottinghamshire estates of this baron included the Vil! of Lenton, and it is believed that it was he who caused this font to be placed in the Priory, though it may have been given by the grandson of this man, who was also a Crusader and a benefactor to the Order of S. John of Jerusalem.
The following is a description of the carved panels :
Side.—Decorative Maltese Cross, the eight parts of which represent the eight Beatitudes. Panels ornamented with fleur de lis and oak leaves. Each panel is connected by dolphins.
Side. —The Crucifixion. Roman soldier with spear piercing the side of our Lord; two angels above with flaming swords to keep off evil spirits from the pathway to Heaven. Triangular designs at each end of the crogs represent the Holy Trinity. In the lower part of the panels are the two thieves ; the soul of the penitent is seen flying upward (left side), while that of the impenitent is going downwards into the jagged jaws of a dragon; the convolutions of its body are observable at the foot.
Side. —A richly carved panel, the lower tier of which has the baptism of Christ for its central subject. As the figure rises out of the water the Divine hand is shown above bestowing benediction. The figures on either side are the four Evangelists, each being overshadowed by the emblem of the Holy Spirit. The two tiers above represent the Cherubim and Seraphim respectively.
Side.—Divided into four panels. Right-hand panel (top): Combined view of the entombment and the resurrection; the figure of Christ enwrapped with grave clothes; the two angels who rolled away the stone are seen at the right hand of Christ, who is rising with hand uplifted to bless the world. Lower panel (right side): The Church of the Holy Sepulchre as built by the Empress Helena, wife of Constantine; the figure with wings is regarded as a guardian angel; the Saracens had not then destroyed the church, which was afterwards done by the Seljuk Turks. The left-hand panel (top): The Ascension; the Virgin Mary on the left and the heads of the Apostles on the right, with their faces uplifted; the hand of Christ again uplifted in blessing. Lower panel on the left: The three women bringing spices on Easter morning.
S. Paul’s Cathedral Church, Dunedin
134
Consecration .
The consecration of S. Paul’s Cathedral, which took place on Thursday, February 13, 1919, marked the completion of a portion of the life task of the Primate, Bishop Nevill, who for years laboured untiringly with the object of one day having a Cathedral erected in Dunedin. The architectural beauty of the structure is the first thing that strikes the eye; inside and out it is a place of beauty.
The attendance was as large as the seating could provide for, and hundreds who were anxious to be present were unable to gain admittance. The gathering was truly representative of the town. Sir James Allen (Acting Prime Minister), accompanied by Lady Allen and her daughter, sat in a front seat, and in the seats immediately in the rear were Mr. J. J. Clark (Mayor of Dunedin), Mrs. Clark, and the following representatives of the City Council: —Messrs. Shacklock, Scott, Gilkison, Hayward, Bradley, Lunn, Begg, Hancock, Thomson, Kellet, and Douglas. Among others present were : The Revs. A. Cameron (Chancellor of the Otago University), W. Gray Dixon (Moderator-elect of the Presbyterian General Assembly), W. Trotter, W. Saunders, M. Diamond, and C. Dallaston, Colonel J. Cowie Nichols, and the girls of S. Hilda’s College, under the charge of Sister Etheleen.
The following is a list of the clergy and Cathedral officials who were present-
Diocese of Dunedin. —The Primate (Dr. Nevill), Dean Fitchett, Archdeacons Richards, Woodthorpe, Fitchett, and Russell, Canons Curzon-Siggers, Fynes-Clinton, Small, and Nevill (Sub-Dean of the Cathedral), the Revs. H. S. Bishop, A. C. Button, H. F. Davis, H. O. Fenton, N. Friberg, W. A. Flamblett, V. G. Bryan King, R. de Lambert, A. D. Mitchell, A. S. Moffatt, J. Morland, J. L. Mortimer, C. H. Statham, S. Stephens, E. D. Street, W. Uphill, C. E. P. Webb, S. B, Wethey, A. Wingfield, and E. Whitehouse; also two chaplains to the forces, the Revs. H. O. Money and C. Bush King; also three in deacons' orders, Revs. S. Cooper, W. W. Ewart, and F. V. Fisher.
Visiting Clergy.—Bishops of Waiapu (Sedgwick), Christchurch (Julius), and Wellington (Sprott), Archdeacons Williams and Haggitt, Canon Coates, the Revs. T. H. Clarke, - P Jones, E. H. Mules, G. Mutter, and D. Rankin.
During the octave of the Consecration there were daily celebrations at 8 a.m. and Festal Evensong at 7.30 p.m. On Thursday the preacher was the Ven. Archdeacon Richards; Friday, Ven. Archdeacon Woodthorpe; Sunday, the Bishops of Christchurch and Waiapu; Monday, Ven. Archdeacon Russell; Tuesday, Ven. Archdeacon Fitchett; Wednesday, Rev. Canon Curzon-Siggers. On the Consecration day Floly Baptism was ministered at 3 p.m., several children being baptised, the first being the son of Mr. C. Meyer, a member of the Choir.
130
Concecration of the New Organ.
The new organ was consecrated at a special service and combined Choir festival on Tuesday, December 7, 1920, in the presence of a congregation which occupied every seat, while many scores had to stand. The case, which is a very handsome one, has been made from designs by Messrs. Gemmell and Moore of New Zealand rimu, dull and polished. The specification for the instrument was drawn up by the builders, Messrs. Henry Willis and Sons, and Lewis and Co. (Ltd ), London, in consultation with the Cathedral Organist (Mr. E, Heywood, F.R.C.0.). The instrument stands in a lofty chamber on a level of 12ft. from the floor of the Cathedral, in the first aisle bay on the north side. It consists of three manuals, CC to C (61 notes), and a Willis concave and radiating pedal board, CCC to G (32 notes). There are 46 speaking stops and 14 couplers, making a total of 60 draw stops. It contains 2467 pipes, thus having 683 more pipes than the next largest organ in the Dominion. The action is tpbular-pneumatic throughout, the repetition and attack being perfect. The console is of fumed oak. The pitch of the organ is French normal diapason—Csl7. The blowing installation is placed in a specially arranged chamber in the crypt, and consists of a Willis rotary blower electrically driven. Starting and stopping are accomplished by pressing a push button at the console. The organ has been erected in the Cathedral by Messrs. C. Begg and Co,, under the direction of Mr. Edward Alden.
The service opened with the usual processional hymn, accompanied on the old organ. On the Bishop and clergy reaching the front of the organ, the Chancellor handed the key of the instrument to the Bishop and asked him to dedicate it. The Bishop replied:—
We receive this organ and dedicate it for use in this Cathedral Church, to the glory of God and for His praise in the beauty of holiness. In the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost. Amen.
The special psalm was the 107 th, which was sung to a setting by Mr. Heywood. The Service used for the occasion was Tours in F, and the anthem was “Blessed be God the Father” (Wesley). One of the hymns (391) was arranged to the tune of “Land of Flope and Glory.” The Rev. H. O. Fenton (Vicar of Anderson’s Bay), who was responsible for the whole of the arrangements, intoned the service, Canon Nevill read the lessons, and the preacher was the Rev. A. Wingfield (Vicar of Holy Cross), who preached from Psalm 150, v. 3 —“ Praise Him with the sound of the trumpet.”
All the city and suburban Choirs were represented in the Choir Festival, which was part of the service; and the ladies in the parish Choirs were provided with seats parallel to the Choir stalls.
The clergy present were; Revs. A. Wingfield, W. Uphill, H. 0. Fenton, F. V. F'isher, J. H. Rogers, H. S. Bishop, and L. Whitehead, Canons Fynes-Clinton, Small, and Nevill, Archdeacons Fitchett, CurzonSiggers, and Woodthorpe, the Bishop, attended by his Chaplain (the Rev. V. C. Bryan King), and Bishop Nevill.
S. Paul’s Cathedral Church, Dunedin
S. Paul’s' Cathedral Church, Dunedin
131
The processional hymn, “Praise my soul, the King of Heaven (to Goss’s tune), was accompanied on the old organ which had been so well used by Mr. Arthur Towsey, Mr. J. C. Norman, Mr. W. L laylor, and other organists. The other hymns were “Brightly gleams our banner ” and “ Angel voices ever singing,” to Monk’s tune. The offertorium was from Merkel’s “Sonata in B Minor,” and the outgoing voluntary was an extract from Mendelssohn’s “First Sonata.”
OLD PARISHIONERS.
One interesting- little book 1 found, without any binding, headed “Contribution Towards Building a New Church, payable, half in January, 1861, the remainder in June, 1862.“ The Bishop of Christchurch heads the list; then come C. Young, W. Day, John Jones, T. H. Harris, George Smith, R. B Martin, K. A. Filleul, T. Barnes, Sames, Shanks, F. L. Mieville, T. Rainton, T. C. Bellamy, Tudor Williams, John Switzer, James Toms, Chas. Logie, W. H. Mansford, H. F. Hardy, Dr. Hocken, R. I. Cantrell, C. F. Black, A. Jackson, E. McGlashan, G. Dawson, F. Green, Dr. Hulme, Wm. Blhck, Colonel Gore Brown, James Allen, I. T. Thomson, and many other worthies of Dunedin. Then comes a list of members of the congregation in 1861, which is worth preservation : Bryan, T. Phillips, E. McColl, 1. Kissling, Junor, A. Chaloner, Dr. Hocken, Darling, Henningham, G. Smith, John McGregor, Lusk, Dixon, Pantlin, A. B. Graham, Macallister, J. Murray, Willis, M. Royse, W. W. Tickle, R. Cantrell, Webb, Ick, O’Connor, Lakeman, Creagh, C. Logie, Stevenson, Kenyon, Miss Robertson, S. Jones, Job Wain, Morse, W. Day, Barker, Prendergast, Mrs. Muir, Fenwick, H. Howorth, F. Orbell, Provost, M. Sholl, Combe, A, Jackson, Jas. Rattray, H. Clapcott, G. B. Maclean, W. Smith, Tuckwell, J. A. Douglas, Switzer, Every, Irvine, Ward, Turner, L. M. South, G. Cook, E. Quick, Wilkinson, Buchanan, B. Pike, W. Mason, Cuthmore, Caddy, Gore, Dr. Hector, H. A. Moore, H. McColl, D. White, Mrs. Fish, Mrs. Spence, F. B. Waters, Edmonston, Dr. Martyn, C. Webb, Crump, Shurry, Miss Barnwell, Jas. McKenzie, Mrs. Kingcomb, A. Parker, H. Smith, Sidney James, F. Hardy, Dr. Wilson, W. Houghton, R. L. Jeffreys, Mrs. Cooper, R. B. Martin, A. Carrick, J. T. Wright, A. Alston, J. W. Jenkinson, Baird, Moss, B. Haggitt, F. Jones, A. C. Strode, Gillow, Mrs. T. Cargill, Captain Williams, Captain Montgomery, Wickens, Mountfort, Muddock, J, T. Thomson. W. C. Young, F. J. Alderson, J. T. Brodrick, Dr. Nelson. Besides this little book, there is a Pew Book of 1861-2, which is of interest. It contains most of the names given above, and some others: —T. S. Watson, Mr. Teger, Havers, F. V. Martin, Captain Hamilton, T. W. Bamford, W'm. Evans, Mr. Vause, Thos. Corbett, Mr. Aldrich, B. Pike, S. H. Andrews, E. Musgrovc, Captain Boyd. T. S. Douglas, Mr. Buscan, Towers, Fulton, Miss Trumble, W. H. Gotten, Fen, etc.
Permanent link to this item
https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/books/ALMA1922-9917504083502836-Samuel-Tarratt-Nevill--first-Bis
Bibliographic details
APA: Nevill, Samuel Tarratt. (1922). Samuel Tarratt Nevill, first Bishop of Dunedin, 1871-1919, Primate of N.Z., 1904-1919 : with a short history of S. Paul's Cathedral, Dunedin. Otago Daily Times and Witness Newspapers.
Chicago: Nevill, Samuel Tarratt. Samuel Tarratt Nevill, first Bishop of Dunedin, 1871-1919, Primate of N.Z., 1904-1919 : with a short history of S. Paul's Cathedral, Dunedin. Dunedin, N.Z.: Otago Daily Times and Witness Newspapers, 1922.
MLA: Nevill, Samuel Tarratt. Samuel Tarratt Nevill, first Bishop of Dunedin, 1871-1919, Primate of N.Z., 1904-1919 : with a short history of S. Paul's Cathedral, Dunedin. Otago Daily Times and Witness Newspapers, 1922.
Word Count
69,829
Samuel Tarratt Nevill, first Bishop of Dunedin, 1871-1919, Primate of N.Z., 1904-1919 : with a short history of S. Paul's Cathedral, Dunedin Nevill, Samuel Tarratt, Otago Daily Times and Witness Newspapers, Dunedin, N.Z., 1922
Using This Item
Out of copyright (New Zealand)
To the best of the National Library of New Zealand’s knowledge, under New Zealand law, copyright in this book has expired.
You can copy this item, share it, and post it on a blog or website. It can be modified, remixed and built upon. It can be used commercially. If reproducing this item, it is helpful to include the source.
For further information please refer to the Copyright guide.
Log in