MR. KEMPTHORNE AND THE SYNOD.

New Zealand Herald, Volume V, Issue 1308, 25 January 1868, Page 5

MR. KEMPTHORNE AND THE SYNOD.

'io the Editor of tho Herald.

Sir,—X shall feel much obliged if you will publiaH the accompanying letter which. I sent to th Southern Cross.i I supposed that tho Editor would, as a matter of 6imple justice, have willingly published the letter, with my reply to the series of strange statements made against me in the Dioces-an Synod in September, 1566, which appeared in that paper. In hia long notice, however, he studiously evades any reference to this my request, and favours me with advice to he satisfied with the publicity which you have been so good as to give to my letter to Sir "Win. Martin ; but in applying to him the question of publicity was of very secoridaiy importance, because I have ensured a much larger publicity than the sphera of the Cross can give. In two previous instances I found tho Cross tm» wil ing to allow freedom to tho expression of opinion on public questions, but T confess I hardly thought that in this case, after having given circulation to calumnies (accuiatelv reported aj far as it went},' ho should refuse to 2'" e circu ution to their refutation. 'J'he Cross finds my pamphlet to be a species of " light literatureperhaps that may indune some to read it—others think it rather woighiy; opinions will differ. It is satisfactory that ho can find no other fault with it, but its length. That some considerable prejudice possessed his mind seems evident, fi-otn his "scrupulously avoiding ui. iu<- into it." He must be pressed for master and yet urged by a sti-ocg bias when he would lead the public to think that the question at issue (comprised, as he say j , in fourteen rages of very small piiat, and copious notes, still smaller,") turns upon a casual correction in a note of an erroneous statement made before the 6'ynod, about "the neglect of che poor." Two laTs adopted by tho Synod, and a letter to the Secretary of State, according to the Editor, turn upon this grand question! I think I may say, "Heally that is too much ; the mark is overshot." Tho Cross elegantly characterizes mj r pamphlet as an attempt to muzzle the £ymd ; but I take this to be a " backward translation/' if he had not " scrupulously avoided dipping into" the facts, he would have seen that it was the Synod who attempted to " muzzle" me. I was not satisfied—begging the Cross's pardon—to be put down in such a brusque, o'f-htnd style. The effect has been to compel me to mate the matter more public, and so far it has answered my purpess. As one of old said, "If there be none of these things whereof they Accuse mt, no man may deliver me unto them;—l appeal unto Cajsar." Wc are not yet, thanks to the General Assembly, undei- a sacerdotal Cunon Law, and I hype we never shall be : the process of muzzling, of which the Cross seems to approve, is therefore not so easy. There is ample reason for publicity; when a Petition was sent to Her Majesty, three yeirs ago, from one " Order," with the intention of altering tho whole p:lity of our Church, Churchmen in general knew nothing wliutever about it. \ihe Cross i-S astonied at my presuming to wish to mako known through him, some "matters of my complaint : with your permission, I will by and by briefly show that tho intention was not so very unreasonable.—l am, Ac, S. Keuithorxe.

COPT OP LKTTRK TO THE " SOUTHERN CEOSS."' Xo tho Kditor of the Southern Cross. Auckland, January 18th, 1868. Sik, —The report of the weting cf the Diocesan Synod of the Church of itnglund, in your issue of September 20th, 18'iG, contained a series of injurious not to lay opprobrious charges respecting me, while preferring complaints agaiust tlie annual report of a St. Mary's thin side the water. Tn the pamphlet which ; have addressed to Sir Willir.m Martin on the tubjeet cf rhe Church Constitution, I have stated the facts regarding Boma of these charges, and especially in section 4. p. 10, the facts in reply to tho particular charge, that " the statement respecting the neglect of the poor was untrue." Ths Synod at its last meeting in June, declined to gl-ro mo any opportunity of answering theso charges. I should feel obliged, therefore* if you will do ma the favour to publish that 4th section in your pnper, as it states tho facts niirt explains the principles by whieli my conduct was guided. I have, in a spirit of forbenrance, allowed so long a time to elapse without noticing these charts, hoping that the Synod would really have seen the justice and necessity of investigating the corr plaints brought before them, in tho manner suggested by the Lord Bishop ; if that had been dene, my own justification, as a mattei of Eeccndary importance, would hays been made sufficiently evident.—l am, &c., S. Kjoipthobxe. P. c » —ln a subsequent letter, I may probably askf yon to allow me to mention some of tho matters o eomplai'it, the investigation of whi-h seemed so distasteful to tho Synod. The present position of civil affairs does not afford ground lor ninth congratulation as to the success we have attained in '■ governing ourselves"—" without interference," and the facts £ shall have to mention, will 1 think, sliow that out Ecclesiastical concerns have fared no better, (I mean of course as regards the Churdi ■ f Ki;glar>d), and in the latter case, tho course pu'tu d has been in a fundamental, point, contrary tu the principle pio-fesc-jd. [In justice to Mr. Eempthorne we publish the letter, which our contemporary in fairness ought himself to have do no. We lmve not, however, space in these columns for thu further remarks promised by Mr. Kemptliorr.e. The public care little or nothing lor these Chun h disputes. The question of the Eoyal iiprenwy is one of supreme indifference, we belitve, to ninety-nine per cr-nt. of our readers. Here wr have no State Church, and Bhall take good car thit we have none. Even if the Assembly wen* i'< oli->h enough to pass " Sacerdotal Canon Laws " th" < n!y effect such laws would have would be to cmpt; tK ;■ • iscopal Churches p.tid starve the clergy into seei, u rim necessity for the'r immediate repeal.—Rd > Z H ]