DIOCESAN SYNOD.

Press, Volume XLV, Issue 7141, 31 August 1888, Page 5

DIOCESAN SYNOD.

AFTERNOON SESSION. Thursday, Atoust 30. The President took his soot at 4 p.m. Canon Cholmondeley laid on the table the ordinary parochial returns. The Synod again went into Committee to consider the resolutions recommended by the Pension Board. , At 5.35 p.m. progress was reported, nna leave was granted to the Committee to sit again on Friday, at half-past seven. The President moved—" That a Committee be appointed by ballot to consider and report upon the circumstances under which the loan of £50,000 was contracted by the Church Property Trustees, ami on the question in dispute between the Church Property Trustees and the Sinking Fund Trustees, with power to call for all opinions and correspondence connected with the same." lie did not intend to'add anything to what he had said on tho subject in his address to the Synod, lie would read a letter he hail received from the mortgagees, asking him to move in the matter, tie did uot intend, ho might add, to avail himself of the privilege of becom- -• iDg a member of the Committee. The Hon. J. 13. A. Acland seconded the motion. The Dean rose to a point of order, and submitted that, according to tho Standing Orders, the names of the members of the proposed Committee should have been given notice of. The Pkesidext said that under section 5S of the Standing Orders it was provided that the President should bo guided by the rules of the Legislative Assembly, when provision was not mado in the Orders to meet a caso. On looking up tho rules referred to it was found that a Committee could be elected by ballot without notice, and tho President ruled his motion was in order. Mr Mclntyhe asked whether the ivjotion was not a vote of censure out.Vie Church Property Trustees. ("JS'o, no.") The Primate said his name had been put forward in making the application for the loan, making use of his oillee to gain, as it were, the acceptance of tho loan with the public in England. lie came forward in the matter ou account ot tho Church iv Christchurch, as Bishop of the dioeesu, and not on the part of the trustees, though he was a trustee himself by Ace o£ Parliament. What had been contemplated, ho held, was not to the credit of thu diocese, and would do serious damuge to the causa of the Church. Mr Urigg pointed out in reply to Mr Mclntyre, that what the Church Property 'Trustees had done was by direction of tho Synod, and the motion could not therefore be taken ac a vote of censure. Canon Stanford held that the facfco£ there being a dill'erence of opinion wvs quite sullicient to warrant the JBisAiop moving in the matter. The debate was interrupted by the 0 p.to» adjournment. EVENING SESSION. The Synod resumed nt 7.30 p.m. - The Key. C. H. Gosskt moved—" That the Bill to amend Statute 3, Schedule B, be read a second time and considered in Committee." .:• After discussion, tho Bill was withdrawn. The Key. Canon Cik>i.mondel£y xntoved —" That the Bill to amend the Financial Regulations be read a second time and considered in Committee." - ■■ , The Key. F. Knqwxes seconded the motion. A lengthy discussion followed, and tho Bill was thrown out sin a division by 43 to 28. Mr W. H. Haroreavks resumed tho debate on the President's motion. He said ho did not wish to offer any opposition to it. He contended, however, if- ib was his Lordship's intention that tho Synod should have an opportunity of speaking its mind on the matter .of the property tax in arrears and the lotial expenses incurred then it would be necea- - sary for his Lordship to say how far the Committee should move. Ifc would havvs saved time if a resolution waa before* Synod to that effect. The Committee that was to be appointed might see tltelr way to report that they thought it advisable not to interfere, and the Synod would then be in the same position as at present, and his Lordship would not view that position with any greater satisfaction than he viewed the action of tho Trustees. He wishedto recognl3o most fully that those trustees\who had undertaken the office of Commissioners under the trust deeds as mortgagees, did so in a purely voluntary manner, and that fchey deserved protection on the part of the Church Property Trustees ana the Synod. He thought his Lordship's motion should be withdrawn, as he could not sco what good would be done by it. If a direct rest?lution were placed before the Synod ex w pressing ths opinion as to whether thu property tax should be paid or not by tho Trustees, the question would be settled. Otherwise, he did not think anything could be done, seeing the Court of Appeal had decided the matter, and even i£ tho Synod decided it was undesirable tho tax should be paid by the debenture-holders, and the Privy Council decided in favor ;of the trust, the position would be the sboto as at present. Mr H. P. MurraTnAynsley, one of tha mortgagees, gave an explanation of the position of atfairs. <H.e trusted that the resolution brought forward would be carried, so that the Committee could take evidence and obtain all Information possible. He explained that the mortgagees (the late Mi H. J, Tancred, Mr G> C. Bowen, and himself) had been aslied yeara ago by the Church Property. Trustees to allow their names to appear as endorsements on debenturesthey wanted to issue in London for the purpose of getting money cheaply. The endorsers had all the work done for them. Now they fouud themselves in this position, that they were suddenly called upon as mortgagees to pay the property tax due. They had had nothing to ao -with the sale of the debentures. That was all done by the Church Property Trustees, and the debonturt)* holders were secured on land out m New Zealand. What the mortgagees said was, let the Synod appoint a committee to go into the whole question. The moral aspect to be decided on was whether they ought to meet the debenture holders Or not. The motion was not a vote "of densure on the Church Property Trustees or Sinking Fund Trustees. r Canon Cholmondely said he-had gftrfe loubts as to the wisdom of the course tlSa Synod waa invited to take, but as a. Churci'i Property, Trustee he had no objection bp v it, and he did not regard it in auy way as i vote of censure ou the Trustees. Tfce natter had been, as members of the Synod would admit, very difficult and perplexing/ The Trustees were bot acting on. it legal technicality, but in equity and good conscience. He pointed oat that when he matter waa before the Synod last year a member moved that it wf s desirable the Church Property Trustees should pay the property tax irrespective of the legality'of the matter. The resolution met With'littlo favor on the part of the Synod, was only seconded pro forma, and after considerable discussion, was lost orf the voirces. Several members held that tho Synod could not settle the question, and that it could only be settled by an He held tnat the vole taken was an expression of the mind of the Synod, and the Trustees had therefore not acted contrary to the wishes of the Synod. . f Mr Griug asked if it were not d fact that the reaeon why the motion of last year met with such scant support was because rf the meagre knowledge- members possessed of the subject. He had asked the Synod at ita previous session not to incur legal expenses, but to confine itself to tlte consideration of the moral aspect of the question, seeing there waa a moral aspect with regard to the mortgagees. The course for them now was not to approachthe question without obtaining full information to be placed before members of tho Synod, so that they would not be called upon to vote in the dark. He entirely disagreed r with tiw suggestion of Mr Hargreavee lution would be sufficient, as they could not thereby get sufficient knowledge oh thesubject to place before members. There was not the slightest idea of bringing censure on the Trustees, as ho was of opinion that they could not have acted in any other way than they had done, for they bad acted on legal advice.," They had no other course, but that did not alter the aspect of the question as far an other persons were concerned. -. Mr A. C. WXlson read the conclusion ol the judgment of the Court of Appeal; to show that the case he contended was only decided on the slightest technical point. There was no doubt it would be a hardship on *ny one mortgagee to pay bis portion of the property tax due, but it would be a eerioue matter to have to pay the tax for the next twenty-one years. He maintained, however, that it was possible Ins Lordship might he the means of induces fhe Committee to act In opposition to the SwrfthTland. (No, no.r The law was that the mortgagees should pay the proH.B. GHBBSON with what had fallen from Cnnon mondeley, and though he was a <&urcJ»

sasßsesggES sVthey were nnder a Certain obligation to the debenture motion in its present formThe took leave to doubt A as towhetherthey should% the tax or not would have been The'BBKS said the moral and legal aspect were the same in the case. It troutd be detrimental to the interests of the Church if the Synod refused to grant the Select Committee asked for by the Bishop. Mr A. Ross supported the motion. Mr J. M. Heywood spoke at length in explanation of the position. He asked that the Synod should not be led away by sentiment, but look at the subject from a business point of view. He expressed his deep regret that the Trustees and his Lordship had not been at one together in the matter, but he hoped, however, his Lordship would see that there was some consideration for the Trustees in the difficult position in which they had been placed. He expressed hia sorrow that at the close of his Ixjrdship's days among them there should be cast any shadow over the relations between them. (Applause.) The Rev. C. Bowen havine spoken, the motion was carried without dissent. The Synod adjourned at 10.35 p.m. till 4 p.m. to-day.