THE COLENSO CASE.

Press, Volume VII, Issue 803, 26 May 1865, Page 3

THE COLENSO CASE.

The Judicial Committee of the Privy Counciljhare given judgment in this case. The lords present were the Lord Chancellor, Lord Eangsdowni <Lbrd Oran* worth, the Master of the Bolls, and Dr. Lushington. The facts of this case have already been published. It appears-that the Bishop of Natal had been aummoned to appear before the Bishop of Cape Town, as metropolitan of the Church in Africa, to answer charges of heresy. He protested and did not appear. The tribunal, however, found him guilty, and sentenced him to be deprived of his see. He appealed to the Privy Council, on the ground of Cape Town had no authority to deal with his ease. The Bishop of Cape Town; onthe other hand, urged that if there was any power of appeal it was not to the Privy CounoE bat to the Archbishop of Canterbury. The Lord Chancellor has now delivered the judgment of the Council. It is wholly in favour of , Bishop Colenso, and is shortly to this effect, that, although the Bishop of. Gape Town has no authority at all over the Bishop of Natal, yet, on the, same principle, neither the Bishop .of Natal, nor any other colonial biehop not created under special legislative provision, has any authority over any one <toe. ■ They are bishops, and nothing more; they: are not bishops of any place * or over anybody in particular. . If their ordination, of itself conveys the capacity of exercising spiritual functions, such as Confirmation and Ordination, they of course possess that capacity; but they have no authority to exercise it. -They are, in short, in very much the same - position as any dergtnian of the Church of England who is not appointed to a definite cure. He is a priest or s> deacon, but he holds, so local office and has no authority over any one. They are, in fact, as much bishop* in the Feejee Tslands aa in their nominal" dioceses, and, on the other hand, they are to no greater extent bishops in their dioceses than they would be in. the Feejee Islands.'. The principles from which, these sweeping respite follow are vary clear and simple. It is laid down as " dear upon principle , ," that after the establishment <d tan independent legislature in any colony or settlement ft ere is no power in the Crown to create of \\d mere prerogative "any eex&ms«tioal*:4K)rpora£ta vrboee riatms, rights, and authority * fee- colony should be required to recognise,". still less to a metro* politansee, with jurisdiction over the sees of other independent settlements. Now; the letters patent both of Dr. ©ray and of Dr. Oolenao were issued after distinct legislative power* had been granted both to the settlement of the Cape of Good Hope and to the colony of Natat The clauses, therefore, in the letters patent of these two bishops, «nd of «& other colonial bishops in a similar wjneh, seem, to have such an eflfect, areeimply was not eron legally competent tar the Bubopof Batal rolactanly to give, or for this Bishop of X3ape Town to henre, aqy roeh junidjci£pß t