DIOCESAN SYNOD.

Press, Volume XLVI, Issue 7342, 21 June 1889, Page 6

DIOCESAN SYNOD.

Wednesday, June 20. The Synod resumed at 4 p.ra. Hie Lordship the Primate in the chair. The Very Key. the Dean obtained permission to lay before the Synod two letters from Mr R. Wilberfoss, respecting the accounts. The letters, which were read, appear elsewhere.

Mr Percy J. Fryer moved—"That it be an instruction to the Church Property Trustees to allocate a further and sufficient portion of the English loan to the Dean and Chapter Estate for the purpose of consolidating the floating, debt thereon. And that such allocation shall also embrace •» fair proportion of the sinking fund in respect of the past advance of £4000 and the proposed apportionment." In his argument in support of the motion, he brought forward instances which; he held, showed the fallacy of the statements made by the Diocesan Treasurer, and that those who should have conserved the Trust had abused it.

The motion was seconded by Mr Parsons, and elicited some discussion, which was interrupted by the 6 o'clock adjournment. The Synod resumed at 7.80 p.m. The Rev. W. E. Ghxam moved—" That the Synod proceed to the election of three Church Property Trustees in the place of Messrs Meares, Neave, and Bridge, resigned." Mr Pahsons seconded the motion, which was carried.

Twenty-six nominations were made. Of that number twenty declined to stand, the majority giving want of time to attend to the necessary duties as-the reason. The names of the six members in respect to whom the t ballot for three Trustees was taken, were the Rev. Canon Stanford, Yen. Archdeacon Bbwen, Rev. E. R. Otway, Messrs Whitefoord, Baldwin, and Grigg. The election resulted in the return of the Yen. Archdeacon Bowen, Rev. Canon Stanford, and Mr J. Grigg. The debate was resumed by the Rev, Mr Stack, on Mr Fryer's motion. In the course of the debate MrHiKgreaves referred to the examination by the Special Committee of Mr Weston, and said that if that gentleman complained of the treatment he received he had himself the most to blame for the manner in which he approached the Committee. He (Mr Hargreaves) disclaimed that the Committee intentionally acted discourteously to Mr Weston or any other gentleman who was examined by the Committee. The Trustees did not give to the Committee that assistance which the Synod ought to expect. If the Trustees' position was impregnable they should have courted a full enquiry, and have made a full disclosure of the position of the Trustees and intention of the Board. They were for the time servants of the Synod, and the Synod having regard for those Trustees, it was their duty to lay before the Synod when called upon a clear statement of their affairs. He condemned the idea that the Trust should be considered apart from all religious feeling. The Trust was not a secular one. Trustees had a solemn responsibility upon them, and if they found that they occupied a a position at variance with tne Charter under which they held seats in the Synod, it was their duty to resign. lie regretted the position into which matter* had drifted, and was sorry that such statements had been made as those which hud appeared in the public press, and would be read by other religious bodies. He felt extremely hurt at certain imputations cast at him, and in expressing his feelings upon the subject was so overcome that he was unable for a little to proceed with his observations. He afterwards spoke upon the deposit system and Mr Fryer's motion. . •

Mr Mclnttbe and the Rev. Mr Watson spoke upon the question, after which Mr Fbyek replied. The division upon the motion resulted as under:—Ayes, clergy 16, laity 10: noes, clergy 16, laity 16. The motion was lost. The Synod then adjourned until 4 p.m. to-day (Friday).