The Evening Star: WITH WHICH ARE INCORPORATED The Evening News, Morning News, and Echo. THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 27, 1890.

Auckland Star, Volume XXI, Issue 48, 27 February 1890, Page 4

The Evening Star: WITH WHICH ARE INCORPORATED The Evening News, Morning News, and Echo.

THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 27, 1890.

For the cause that lacks assistance, Per the wrong that needs resistance, For the future in the di3tanee, And the good that we can io.

The comedy of errois, -it seems, in the matter of the Anglican Primacy is not yet complete. Our readers are aware that there are two bishops, each claiming to be Primate, the Bishop of Wellington (Hadfield), and Dr. Suter, Bishop of Nelson. Bishop Hadfield was elected to the Primacy by the General Synod in its last &essio n (1889); but the "Standing Commission " has declared this election to be void by reason of its not being in conformity with a certain statute of the Synod. This decision is questioned on two grounds ; first, that a resolution adopted and an election made by the Synod was adequate to set aside, pro tanto, the previous enactment referred to ; and secondly, that the Standing Commission is not empowered to adjudicate upon such a question. Assuming, however, that Bishop Hadfield is not Primate, then the holder of the office at present is Bishop Suter, he being the- " Senior Bishop " by priority of consecration — that is, if Bishop Harper has as yet resigned the bishopric of Christchurcb.

A Southern telegram in our last night's issue stated that a new solution of the difficuily has been suggested and is under discussion between the Bishops of Nelson and Auckland. This proposal is that Bishop Suter should resign the Primacy, whereupon Bishop Cowie, as next Senior Bishop, would be Primate for the present, and that the Bishop of Auckland should then forthwith resign the Primacy in favour of the next bishop in the order of priority, the Bishop of Wellington. This proposal appears to us to be wholly impracticable. The question is governed by the following enactments of the General Synod (Title A, Canon I.):-

"27. The Primate, for the time being, may at any time, by writing under his hand, addressed to the Senior Biefeop as aforesaid, or if he himself is the Senior Bishop, then to the next in order of seniority, resign the office of Primate, and upon the receipt of such resignation by such Bishop, the office of Primate shall become vacant.

" 28. In case of a vacancy in the office of Primate by death, resignation, or otherwise, the Senior Bishop, as aforesaid, for the time being shall be and act as Primate until the General Synod shall make other provision in that behalf."

Doubtless if Bishop Suter resigns his alleged Primacy, then Bishop Cowie at once becomes his successor in that capacity, the previous resignation of the Christchurch bishopric being assumed. But suppose the Bishop of Auckland thus to become Primate, how, in the name of all that's reasonable, could he hand it over to the Bishop of Wellington ? It is not a personal chattel, to be disposed of in that offhand manner. No ;if the hypothetic Primate wished to divest himself of the office, he could only send his resignation to the Senior Bishop, Dr. Suter; and the latter would again be Primate —that is, if he ever has been so, which is, to say the least of it, gravely questionable. The foregoing comments go on the supposition that Dr. Harper is no longer Bishop of Christchurch. The telegrams received with reference to the proposal in question assume that γ-bis resignation has actually occui*red. If that assumption is wrong, the effect of the suggestion said to be under consideration oi the Bishops of Nelson and Auckland would still be quite different from that represented in the telegrams. The venerated ex-Primate would resume that office, and hold it until a special meeting of the General Synod could be held. .