THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND SYNOD.

Otago Witness, Issue 1003, 18 February 1871, Page 7

THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND SYNOD.

The General Synod ol the Branch of the United Church of England and Ireland in New Zealand reaumed its sitting at 4 o'clock on Wednesday the Bth mat. , in the Ci y Council Chamber ; Hia Lordship the Primate presiding.

BISHOP JENNER.

Archdeacon Maunseli. rose to withdraw the following resolution standing in his name :—": — " The Primate having laid before this Synod a letter to him from Bishop Jenner, from which it appears that 1)6 declines to accede to the request of the Synod of 1868, that he skould withdraw his claim to the .Diocese of Dunedin : — Ut, That in accordance with 23rd Bection of the Constitution Act this Synod cannot recognise as bishop in any part o r this ecclesiastical province any person whose nomination has not been sanctioned by it, or by the majority of the Standing Committees of the neveral Dioceses, 2ud. That as this Synod haß not sanctioned, and does not sanction, the appointment of Dr Jenner, Dr Jenner is not, and never was, Bishop of Dunedin." Archdeacon Maunsell said he thought that they had all considered it necessary, in consequence of the letter which Bishop Jen tier addressed to His Lordship, and alao in consequence of other circumstances connected with the case, that Borne action should be taken in the matter by the Synod. He had felt that Bishop Jenner not only argued that he was entitled to be Bishop of Dunedin, but that he had taken a stronger step in debarring his Lordship from exercising his episcopal functions in the Synod. After having, however, conversed with several parties it was considered that it I would be highly undesirable that the question should be discussed by the Synod, although, at the same time, it was admitted that the rights and authorities of the Synod Bhould be maintained. He bow asked the leave of the Synod to withdraw the motion. The motion was withdrawn accordingly. ECCLESIASTICAL OFFENCES. The Dean of Christchurch moved— " For leave to bring in a Bill to define ecclesiastical offences and the punishments thereof, and that the Bill be read a firßt time."

Leave was given, the Bill waß brought in, read a first time, and its second reading and consideration iv committee made an order of the day for Friday.

CENTRAL PENSION BOARD.

Mr E. H. Hbywood moved— " That the report of thb Central Pension Board, and the report of the Committee on Life Insurance appointed by the Auckland Diocesan Synod, be remitted to the Committee on Church Pension Funds, &c, appointed 6th February." The motion was carried. THE PRIVILEGES OF PARISHIONERS.

Mr Mason moved—" That the following alterations in Sttt'Ute No. 4 be aubmiited to the Committee on Statutes and Resolutions, viz — To amend that Statute. 1. By adding in the 7th line of the llfch clause after the word pariah ' or not being a resident in the pariah Bttall ha\e signed a declaration in the Churoh ward en's book that he ia an attendant at the church of that parish,, and wiahea to be enrolled aa a member of that pariah and of no other.' 2. And by adding in the aame line after the word who * in either case.' "

Mr R. B. Martijt pointed out that if this motion wen* carried, it would involve a very important question. He entirely objected to any person residing outside the boundaries of St. Paul's giving a vote iD connection with the conduct of that church. The adoption of the motion would perhaps result in giving an overwhelming power to St. Paul's. Let thoae residing within the boundaries of any parish confine their exertions to the conduct of that particular panah. The Key. Mr Granger remarked that moat aweeping alterations were proposed to be made ; also, that the matter had not been brought before the Diocesan Synod, which body would probably reject it. Dr Donald spoke againat the motion.

Mr Hunter Brown considered that they Bhould work more by the affections than in accordance with the topographical situation of a house. He had heard no argument against a man who lived on one particular aide of a street being prevented from recording hia vote in any particular parish. Canon Wilson considered it was a pity that an air of ridicule should have been displayed in connection with thia question by referring to topographical situations, which might be multiplied to any extent. He could cap Mr Hunter Brown's remarks, by mentioning that he once heard a very estimable gentleman, tell a story afyut hia .having Blept'withj his head m one pariah. *nd Mi fe'etib. another.— (Laughter-) Having referred

to other matters' connected with the question, '' ' 4 Mr Bi Quick pointed out that they could not compel people to got o any particular church — (hear,* hear)-^and" therefore the question which presented itself for 1 their consideration Was whether those who in any way contributed to a particular church should be prevented from voting in connection with, and taking an interest in, the affairs of that church. Mr W. Carr \6tNO remarked that there was more to be said against the motion than in favour of it, and therefore ho intended to vote against it. Ho did not object to persons who resided in one parish visiting a church Bituated in another, but he did object to the parishioners of one pariah having a voice in the management of another. The conduct of the affairs of a church should be left entirely to ita parishioners. Mr K. Lusk opposed the motion.

The Rev. Mr Tanner gave reasons why he considered the motion was a fair one. Where persona gave their offerings, there they Bhould be allowed to vote. Archdeacon Stock and the Bishop of N bison— who remarked that at the Antipodes they had found the aggrieved parishioner — Bpoke in support of the motion. • . Mr Mason, in reply, explained that he simply asked that the alterations which he proposed to make in the Statute Bhould be submitted to the Committee named for their consideration. He was aware that it was au important matter. Ho did not wish to rnah the matter on the bynod ; on the contrary, he desired that it should be thoroughly considered by the Committee, and afterwards brought forward for discußsion. The motion was declared to be carried on ihe voices. The Synod, however, divided on the motion with the following result :— Bishops, ayes, 3 ; noes, 2. Clergy, ayes, 8 ; noes, 7. Laity, ayes, 8 ; noes, 11. Total— Ayes, 19 ; noes, 20. The motion was therefore lost.

TRUSTS.

The Rev. E. H. Hbywood moved— "That the following be remitted to the Committee on Trusts : ' The accounts of the Trustees of the various Trusts laid beforo the General Synod Bhould be duly audited before being presented.'" The Bishop of Auckland seconded. The motion was carried on the voices, and also on a diviaion. The voting was — Bishops, ayes, 3 ; noes, 2. Clergy, ayea, 9 ; noes, 7. Laity, ayes, 13 ; noeß, 5. Total— Ayes, 25 ; noes, 14. It being 6 o'clock, the Synod adjourned, and resumed at 7 o'clock.

CANDIDATES FOR HOLY ORDERS.

The report of the Select Committee appointed to consider matters concerning the supply of candidates for holy orders was laid, upon the table.

HARVEST THANKSGIVING SERVICE.

The Dean of Christchurch moved — " That this Synod do give ita sanction to the use in thia Ecclesiastical province of the Harvest Thanksgiving Service, drawn up and sanctioned by the Convocation of the province of Canterbury in the year 1862, copies of which are laid on the table." He explained the reasons which had induced him to bring the motion forward, and also said that the Dioceae of Christchurch might be regarded to a large extent as an agricultural Dioceße, and that several of the clergy of the Diocese were deßirous of holding special harvest thanksgiving services at the cloae of the present harvest. Sir William Martin aaid that no man would raise any objection to a proposition of this kind, but the motion involved a very serious principle, and he waa curious to know how many copioß of the form of prayer had been laid on the table. The motion proposed to do something more than irecogniae the discretion of the power oi the Bishops to modify the services. It provided forthe introduction of an entirely new form of words. He had no doubt as to the soundness and goodness of every word, but the motion proposed that they Bhould exercise a serious power, that of taking upon themselves to add to the Prayer Book by introducing a new form of words. One of the Secretaries told him that three copies had been laid on the table, but he waa unable to find one. He wished to know what ateps had been taken to make tho Synod acquainted with the form of prayer. He wished the Synod to understand that ho did not object to what had been done ; he merely desired to aacertain whether they were proceeding safely. Mr Hunter Brown moved " That the debate on the motion be adjourned until Friday." The Hon. Dr Buchanan seconded the motion, which was carried on the voices.

BISHOP JENNER.

MrE. Quick moved— " That whereas the last General , Synod of the Branch of the United Church' of England and Ireland in New Zealand took into consideration all the circumstances of the nomination and consecration of Bishop Jenner,

and did thereiupon formally request that he should withdraw his claim to thd position of fcjahop of Dunedin, for the Bake of the peace of the Church, to which" request Bishop Jenner has declined to ac-' cede ; and whereas the law of the Church requires the' Sanction" of the General Synod to the nomination of a Bishop 'to any see in New Zealand — Resolved, that this Synod does hereby refuse to sanction the nomination of Biahop Jeiiner to the see of Duhedin, whether that nomination were, in due form or otherwise. But, at the same time, this SyHod begs to express ita sympathy with Bishop Jenner in the painful position in which he haa been placed." Mr Quick said ho thought the Synod would see that there wore good reasona why he should not say much in support of the mo don. Most of those gentlemen who were members of the Synod, and who were more directly interested in the settlement of this question, agreed that the method by which he proposed to settle the quealion waa the beßt. He would like to ask the members present to give an unanimous vote, inasmuch as it would strengthen the hands of the Church members in this Diocese. He had nothing further to add except that he trusted everyone would join in an expression of sympathy with Biahop Jent ner.

Mr R. B. Martin said he agreed with almost the whole of the resolution ; the extent to which he could not go was in endorsing the private opinion of the mover with regard to the expression of sympathy. He Btcpped there. But he seconded the motion with pleasure. — (Hear, hear.) The Rev. W. Tanner said the Synod conld not spiritually afford that this queßtion should remain unsettled any longer. He would like to have Been the matter settled the other way ; he should then have admired the liberality and catholicity of the Church. Various opinions, however, regarding the question existed, and they desired that it should be amicably settled. He did not wish to say much, but as Bishop Jenner was absent, he thoaght the Synod should not come to a vote without his being in a slight measure represented. He considered they were themselves blameable to some extent. Their house was being swept very clean, and he sincerely hoped that no worse spirits would come into it. —(Oh, oh.) Mr R. Lusk could not give a silent vote upon this matter. It appeared to him that the question was one of fair play. To prevent any misapprehension, he wished it to be understood that ho had no eympathy with the party which was commonly known as Ritualistic. He would say more than that- -that had Bishop Jenner been the lowest churchman to be found in England, or even the lowest churchman to be found in Ireland — (laughter) — he should feel the same aa he did now. It did not appear to him that this was the time, or indeed the place which should be converted into an arena fo»° a struggle between the rival schools of theology. What they had to do in the present case was to act fairly and honestly between man and man. — — (Hear.) Now, what wore they doing 1 They were being asked to give a silent vote — to give a unanimous vote — upon a question, the justice of which waa not at all touched upon. They knew that politeness was a good thing, was a Christian virtue, but it did not stand in the place of justice. The only thing that waa now being done was to give a polite expression of sympathy with Bishop Jenner ; but he was not prepared to say whether such a thing were correct or not. Ho understood that Bishop Jenner had been offered this See, and had accepted it ; and had been consecrated to the See, with a view of being placed in it. He was not aware of any case in which a Bishop, who had been consecrated with a view of being placed in any particular See, had had to have his appointment formally sanctioned afterwards. He was informed on very good authority that aeveral Bishops in New Zealand had been somewhat informally appointed ; but, so far as he knew, there never was any attempt made to cause " a slip between the cup and the lip" in their , cane. He believed — and he said so subject to correction — that the section making sanction necessary waa enacted to provide for special caaes— to provide, probably, for the case of a Biahop who, after consecration, had committed some crime.—(No no.) He waa not bound to that opinion, but would be glad to receive information upon the point. He was not, however, aware of any case in which sane* tion had ever followed consecration. He was at a loss to ascribe any other reason for so doing, and it did appear to him that in attempting to close the matter in the way they were, they were simply doing so at the sacrifice of the trouble of fairly facing (he question of justice ; and he felt convinced that, irl attempting to settle it in that way, they would not hear the end of is. He would rathe* that the question had been cou-

yageotiily' and ftii'rJy met in thVJfaqe, and considered Upon the plain ground rfjraetic'e, asbetween man /and man. r.With these f6w reniarks he would axt dowp, intimating that he intended to oppoie ihe resolution in its pfenent form.

resolution in its present form. Archdeacon Stock observed there appeared to be some misapprehension about the election of Bishops. Whilst the nomination of a Bishop might be acceptable! to the Synod of the particular Diocese over which he was appointed, in order that the nomination might be acceptable to the whole Church, it was required that it should be sanctioned by the General Synod. The resolution was then carried on the voices. RESIDENCE FOR A BISHOP, ETC*. Archdeacon Maunsell rose to mote the following motion t— " That tKa Synod, feeling with the Primate, ' ' that it is for the interests of the Church that this Diocese of Dunedin should to speedily entrusted to the charge of', a Bishop who may be able to reside in it,' request the President— l. To urge the Diocesan Synod of this_ Diocese to take steps for providing a residence for tne Bishop, and for completing the sutn necessary for obtaining the grant 'of S.P.C.K. 2. To obtain from the fiishop of Lichfield the neceasary authority f6r operating upon and rendering more productive the moneys hoir !>ing in tie Bank of New Zealand." Archdeacon Maunsell said he felt that a very important question was now before the Synod. They had to make provision for obtaining the services of a Bishop fo^'thls part 'of the Ecclesiastical Province" of New Zealand. If this Diocese was Jeftnmch longer without the services of a Bishop they could not but feel that its progress wottjd be very seriously retarded. Therefore he should make no apology for bringing the matter before the Synod. He felt that it was incumbent upon the Synod to act in this matter. It was not a question which the Diocesan Synod of this Diocese could take up. They were aware what were the state of the funds of the Diocese for the support of a Bishop. The funds seemed to him to be in' an exceedingly unsatisfactory state, not only as to the amoant, but also as to the at&ie in which the funds were. They found that the Colonial Bishopric Endowment Society and the Society for the Propagation of Christian Knowledge had offered that if L5OOO were raised they would guarantee each LlOOO. They found, however, that none of those societies hid paid any money. He found that although the Bishop of Lichfield stated to the S.P.C.K that they had an amount in hand which would yield L 425 per year, the society seemed to have refused to comply with his request to pay in LlOOO. Thua they were in this position — that all the funds which they had for the endowment of a Bishopric, were the maneys cow in the Bank of New Zealand, and the sum of LlOO guaranteed by the Bishop of Christchurch during his life. The money in the Bank of Now Zealand, an account of which the Bishop of Christchurch was kind enough to obtain from the Bank, amounted to L 1421 ; and that money appeared to be in a state which prevented, their getting much information regarding it. All they knew was that about four years ago the Bishop of Lichfield, then Bishop of New Zealand, travelled through this part of the Diocese and collected a certain sum of money. That money, they might infer from his letter to the S.P.C.K., he paid into the Bank of New Zealand. The Primate applied for information at the Bank, and all he received was a paper which ran thus : — Auckland account, L 473 &s 3d ; account, fixfld deposit, L 948 6s 4d : total, L 1421 Us 7d. Was the money deposited in the Bank in the name of the Bishop of .New Zealand, for the endowment of the Bishopric of Dunedin ?

His Lordship : I am not able to say.

Archdeacou Maunseia , : Then they were in a state of great ignorance in regard to this money. All they knew waa that there was a fixed deposit of L 948 6s 4d, which seemed to have been paid into the Bank four yeara ago, and from statements made by the Bank;, they were led to infer that in four yeara the interest paid on that amount waa only L 36 9a 6d. So that they had L 1421 lying idle in the Bank of New Zealand for four years, whilst the interest only amounted to L 36. They were also in the dark aa to the name in which the money had been deposited, and they could not tell who could operate upon it. If it had been inveated on mortgage, they knew that the money during the last four years — The R«v. Mr Heywood : Might have been lost.

Archdoacon Mattnskli, repeated that if the money had been otherwise inveated the profits' would np doubt haye 1 been greater, Under all the i circumstances of the caae, 'therefore .he lapmht the Synod (should P take^aptlon r ia' '^matter. He certain!^ 'hoped' "the Synod would set

their'way. to appoint the Primate, as, the, head of the Church, to obtain the power r , of , " operating ' upon the money, and it could afterwards be handed over to the Diocesan Synod, or any other trustees, for the 'purpose of making it productive. With .those few remarks he begged to •move the motion standing in his name. Canon WilsonW ilson said he was unwilling to be compelled to vote on" this question. He should therefore be : very glad If the mover would withdraw the motion. It seemed to him, if he understood Archdeacon Maunsell aright, he intimated that the previous question regarding Bishop Jenner having neon disposed of, ie was the duty of the Synod to consider what provision should be made for obtaining Episcopal services for the Diocese of Dunedin. With all deference, however, to Archdeacon Maunsell, he begged to state that he did not think then was their duty ; he did not consider it was their duty under any circumstances, becauae the Constitution invested the Diocesan Synod with the light and privilege of naming their own /Bishop. The -Synod now sitting therefore had nothing whatever to do with the ~ matter. But there was a special reason ~ in this case, which would make him ex- , ceedingly unwilling to vote, or to accept ' the alternative of walking out of the room, and it was this : that under all the circumstances this was a very unseemly time to bring forward such a matter. When ' they knew that their brother Churchmen in Otago had passed through a very painful ordeal, feeling no doubt that it was painful to have had a dispute amongst themselves, or that it should be necessary to .come to the conclusion at which they arrived, he thought they ought to abstain ' from stepping in and saying, now you have settled that difficulty we will give you something further to deal with. The Rev. Mr Burrows did not wish to use a harsh term, but said he thought this was an. unseemly time to bring such ametion before the Synod. Again, as Canon Wilson had stated, it was really business which the Diocesaa Synod of Dunedin should take up. He had reason to believe that that Synod were prepared to call a meeting a3 soon as possible to diacusa the question that had been brought forward. Therefore if Archdeacon Maunsell would not withdraw, the motion he hoped the Synod would negative it , .Mr Lusk thought it desirable that it should be ascertained from the Bishop of Lichfield whether he considered himself "justified in applying the moneys which he himself collected to any other, than the exact purposes for which they were collected. He was informed that in many -cases the money was contributed specifically for Bishop Jenner. — (No, no.) He was informed that such was the, case ; and people merely saying " no" did not make what he said untrue. He was informed as a fact that it was a special endowment for Bishop Jenner. If that were the case, it was very desirable to ascertain whether Bishop , Selwyn would comply with the request contained in the resolution without .consulting those by whom the contributions were made. He hoped Archdeacon Maunsell would withdraw the resolution.

Mr Mason stated (hat applications had J . been mac c for the return of the money ; which had been subscribed towards the 'fund, as It had been subscribed for a fund I'for Bishop Jenner, and not for the bishopric of DuaedinJ Although he knew he would be running the risk of being again compared to Balaam's, ass— (laughter) — by the gentleman who had come forward and taken upon hia own shoulders, the re- ; pponsibility'of advising the taking of steps ' for appointing a bishop to the diocese of Dunedin, he, (Mr Mason) would take the opportunity, as a citizen of Dunedin and jyiember'bf the,! Church, of protesting against- any person interfering , with the 'rights and privileges of , the Synod of ..the aioceae. He would call Bishop Maunaell'a —7(laughter)-r- Archdeacon Maunsell's, but a rßishop',r Bishop', in embryo— attention io , the "clause, of th 6 'Constitution, which provides tfyftt the. nomination of a Bishop should proceed from the Diocesan Synod, and if sanctioned by tW General Synod, or supposing the General Synod not to be ', sitting^ by a majority of the Committees of the several, Dioceße^ and " the Senior Bishop shall take steps to give "eSectto'the'nQn^ina^ion. , The nomina°tibn of a Biahop' evidently rested entirely 'with' the' Diocesan Synod" of Dunedin. *He felt certain now' that , the question of ' Bishop Jenner Was brought to an issue, 'the' Diocesan Synod would lose no time in , taking .steps to provide for the Bishopric. - J -^(Hea ; r,'hear. ) '...>,''. ',',,', ]' '"* Mr H: Brown thought that one of the arguments which had been used, was capable of a 'very different application. He thought that instead of it feeing an unseemly thing, it wm a generous one on "the, part of a clergyman from another Iparfc 'of v the country, ..after the bitter rfeeUns which had been stirred up here, a^d toe smcwideruw J^ioW .which still %in paople'* miadJi, to Ulw,u|>6n him*

self the responsibility, of making the , first i move, andof clearing ..the f way! , by which J to ,provide"for a jbisnoprio, which, .ttos < established, and must be, endowed. He i believed very ,few would. say that the. mover had transgressed against gopd < feeling ; on the contrary, r they were indebted to aim for haying spared their 1 feelings. ,■ r ] Mr E, Quick moved; the previous ques- j tion ; but after discussion he proposed; — i "That the Synod proceed to, the next order of the day.", „ , ;,,,,-, ,- < The Syuoi divided on the amendment, with the following result :— Bishops, Ayes, 2; noes, 3 Clerjjy, ( ayes, 9;, noes, 7. , Lai'y, ayes, 8 ; npea, 11. Total ayes, , 39 ; noes, 21. The amendment was there- , fore lost. . ' Afte* some farther discussion, Arch- i deacon Maunsell eaid he would accept- \ the suggestion which had .been thrown ] out to the effect that he should move the ( motion in the following amended form :—: — , " That the Primate be requested to obtain j from the Bishop of Lichfieid the necessary authority for operating upon and render- j in^ more productive the moneys now lying i in' the Bank of New Zealand." In reply, he desired to make a few remarks. In { the first place, he desired to relieve the ( minds of those gentlemen who appeared • to think that he desired to interfere ( with or dictate to the Diocesan Synod. , His resolution merely urged them to take , certain steps, and he was much astonished t that those gentlemen should also mis- t understand the purport o£ his remarks, { and dream that he talked About nominating a Bishop. He never dreamt of such ( a thing. It really put him in mind of , the old saying, " He made the giants , first, and then he killed thera.'Vr j (Laughter.) Nor coujd he see thai he „ had pursued a course which was un- i aeemly. The Primate had said in his , address, "I will only add that 1 am per- ( suaded that it is for, the interests of the j Church that this Diocese of Dunedin , should be speedily entrusted to the charge ] of a Bishop who may be able to reside in , it; and I shall be very !thankful if arrangements can be made for that parpose, though quite ready , to continue in the charge of it if such arrangement at j this time be thought impracticable." ( Therefore, it would be seen that His Lordship had to thank him, and he was perfectly astonished to hear the remarks which had been made regarding bis coa- j duct. He had thought he was dcing a ] good work; and how, he would ask, i could it be uoseemly, when many of his t Dunedin friends urged him to proceed with the work, aud when threa years ago they refused,, to confirm the nomination of Bishop Jenner,? He trusted that the Synod would endeavour to assist ] their brethren in Dunedin to obtain the money which he had already referred to, I and also in getting a Bishop to reside amongst them. The motion, as amended, was then put, and carried on the voices, and The Synod adjourned at five minutes past 9 o'clock. Thursday, 9th February. m ■■ • PETITION. The Rev. Mr Oldham presented a petition, signed by Mr Kempthorne, Auckland, complaining of certain departures from the compact of 1862, on which the Church Constitution of the colony was founded. LEASING LANDS. Sir William Martin moved—" That the following resolution of the Diocesan Synod of Auck and be referred to the i Committee on Trusts — ' That the General Synod .be requested to memorialise the , General Assembly to extend the power of leasing , lands given to the Trustees of \ Church 5 property under A the Bishop of I New Zealand Trusts' Acts of 1859 and of > 1868, and under the ft'eligioua, Charitable, i and E iucational Trusts Act Amendment ; Act, 1865 i. and' to empower the Trustees , to graat leases of town and ' kuburban t lands'- for a term not exceeding sixty > years. 1 ". The motion was carried. , 1 '>', ' • ■ i v I . . 'BllJi.- , . . ' 5 , Canon Wilson obtained leave to intro- | .duca.a Bill to continue in. force. Statute nice .to the: close of the nexc session of 3 ihe General Synod/ The Bill waa read a ' time,' and- its second reading «nd I consideration in ■ committee' was made an ; Order of the Day foriMonday. , " "\ •"' ' SALfe OF LAND: v „';"/'< a ' The Rev. B, H. HfixwooD/aioyed—^ i. iC Whereas Sir George Alfred Arney has ' applied to the Auckland Diocesan Trusa tees tp purchase from them a .piece, of^ s land containing 2| acres, . or thereabouts, „■ contiguous to his, property at rlemuera ; a and whereas the Auckland Diocesan a Trustees Have requested, the Bishop, of r Auckland to procure the authority, pf this ir Bynod to tbe sale thereof,—Revived—- ;- >, That it be an in«^rnoi4on "to the pommiti II tee on. t*«ati,;appointed o^ $ad .^elh i* ruary, to take the nooeewry slop* for

authorising/the aame, iii compliance Instructions to Trustees, Section ■ , 1, Clause c : ,the amount to be paid to be agreed upon by. valuation." . The motion was seconded by the Bishop Of AtTCKIiAIW). , / On the suggestion of Sir Wit-i«iam-Mabii^t, the, wo^ds " Subject to the approval of the Standing, Committee of the Diocese" were inserted after the italic c in the 16th line. The motion, as amended, was put and carried.

BISHOP JENNER.

Mr Ldsk asked the Primate (as President) — " 1. By whom and in what form a Bpeoific request has beea made to this -present Synod, to give the formal sanction of the Synod to the nomination of Bishop Jenner to the See of Dunedin ?" and "2. If no Bach request has been laid before this Synod, whether any motion can be considered in order, or entertained, which proposes that this Synod shall refuse to give the said sanction ?" His Lordship said : In answer to the first question I have to state that I am not aware that any request has been made to the present Synod to give the formal sanction of the Synod to the nomination of Bishop Jenner to the See of Dunedin. To the second question, " If no such request has been laid before this Synod, whether any motion can be considered in order, or enteztained, wh eh proposes that this Synod shall refuse to give the said sanction/ my answer is : That, looking at the terms of the Constitution, I do not think that this Synod now sitting at Dunedin is a different body from that which met at Auckland in 1868, although it does not consist of precisely the same body of men. It was and is the representative governing body of the branch of the United Church of England and Ireland in New Zealand. To this body the matter in question was referred at its last -meeting for settlement, and a certain resolution was passed which has not been accepted, but .which.' is known to have been formally, if not officially, declined by one of the parties most interested. This being the case it appears to me in order that the matter should be again brought before the Synod for a further expression of its opinion. EXCHANGE OF LAND. Mr Dbwb moved, " That the proposal for the exchange of a piece of land in Milton for a more suitable piece in the same locality be remitted for the con* sid ©ration of the Committee on Trusts." The motion was carried. DIOCESAN BOARDS. The Bishop of Nelson obtained leave to bring in a Bill for establishing Diocesan Boards, for the purpose of considering the general fitness of candidates for ordinaI tion. The Bill was read a first time, and ordered to be printed. LAY READERS AND LAY PREACHERS. The Key. Mr Thorpe moved— "That, in order to give effect to that part of the Primate's address, urging the recognition of lay agency in the Church, and the increase of its efficiency, this Synod recognises the power of the Bishops to grant licenses to duly- qualified and approved persons to act as lay readers, and, in special cases as lay preachers." After discussion, Archdeacon Harper suggested that the Rev. Mr Thorpe should make the following, addition to his motion — " And that jfchia Synod expresses its hope that clergymen will encourage the laity to give them assistance in the parochial work of . visiting their people, and will endeavour to organise such assistance as may seem best in each parish.," „. , v The. addition ,^as v , accepted by Mr Thorpe,- aud the motion, in , its amended form, was carried. ' v . . „ f . , The ..Rev. ',%.. jEL Hfywood pointed out that the adding the .votes togeiher aa had been done in.; ths . newspaper gave an erroneous. ,vjLew on the, subject of. dividing by orders. - The total number of votes was not the way in .which the question was settled. It was provided by section 10 of the Church Constitution "that there should- be a majority of each of the three orders, present in person, at a duly constituted meeting," to cany any i vote. Thus, by careful analysis, it would' be seen that it might ,be^ possible. for the Synod to be composed at one meeting of 6 Bishop?, 24,0iergymep, and 9. Laymen, and all, the Bishops* all the. Clergy; and 4 of the Laity might vote in the affirmative, an(J ye tithe question might be pegatived by 5 Laymen. ,<< . ; The Synod , adjourned at , 20 ; minutes paat 10 o'jclook. . , ,;,,. , <.n,<- <• i. 1 r\ f , - Friday, ,10th -Fkbrttaky. „ ' ' » .' — '. — ' REPORTS. ' Mr Mason brought up the report of the Committee on the qualification of lay elector^ The report was received. , ; The Hon. J. B. Poland brought ,^p' the repo|Jibf, the Committee oaj Statutes md Reaolutiooi, which was reoexytd." * ,

o • .< , i ' * sacpiiAirATiow. . The Rev. E. BL Heywood said he wished to make an explanation in connection with the aermons to be preached in St.. Paul's, Church on Sunday next in aid of the Melauesian Mission, The c>llection made in .St. Paul's Church, Dunedin, for the year 1870— amounting, he believed, to about L 40 — did not appear in the report of the Mission laid upon the table, in consequence of the Treasurer in Auckland not having received the amount in time. HAEVEBT THANKSGIVING SERVICE. The Dean of Christchtjrch obtained leave to postpone the motion standing in hia name — " That this Synod do give its sanction to the use in this Ecclesiastical province of the Harvest Thanksgiving Service, drawn up and sanctioned by the Convocation of the province of Canterbury in the year 1862, copies of which are [ laid on the table " — until the Committee aßked for by Sir William Martin had brought up its report. BILL. On the motion of the Dean of Christchurch, seconded by the Bishop of Nelsojc, leave, was given to bring in a Bill for the subdivision of Dioceses, the j re-arrangement of the boundaries of I Dioceses, the constitution of new Bishoprics, and the appointment of Bishops." The Bill was read a first time ; and the second reading fixed for Monday next. ALTERATION OF STATUTE. The Rev. E. H. HEYwpod moved — " That the following alteration in Statute 11. for organising the Diocesan Synods, be remitted to the Committee on Statutes and Resolutions :—ln: — In section 12 to omit lines 7 and 8, and substitute the following in lieu thereof : ' Convened by the Standing Committee, and when it has met shall elect its own President for that session.'" The rev. gentleman, in speaking to the motion, said one of his objects in bringing it forward was to explain why there had been no Diocesan Synod beld in Auckland, in 1869. When Bishop Selwyn left for the home country, he gave the requisite authority to Archdeacon Lloyd to summon the Diocesan Synod in his absence. In the course of time, however, iiews came of the resignation of Biahop I Selwyn, and the appointment of his successor to the Dioce3e. Archdeacon Uoyd did not summon the Diocesan Synod, because he did not deem Bishop Selwyn's i authority sufficient, a new Bishop having been appointed. j The Bishop of Auckland seconded the motion, - At the suggestion of the Bishop of Wellington, the wording of the resolution was altered. The motion was then put and carried in the amended form — v That the following alteration in Statute IL for organising the Diocesan Synods, be remitted to the Committee on Statutes and Resolutions :—ln: — In section 12, to omit lines 7 and 8, and substitute the following in lieu thereof : * Convened and presided over by the Commissary appointed by the Primate.' " COMMITTEE. ' Sir W* Martin moved, and Canoa Wilson seconded — " That a Committee be appointed to frame and submit to the Synod a draft standing order touching the adoption by the Synod of special or occasional forms of -prayer. That the Committee consist of the Primate, two bishops, three clergymen, and three laymen; to be nominated by the Synod by ballot." Carried. - In accordance -with the resolution, the folia wing Committee was * appointed :—: — The. Primate and the Bishops of Nelson and Wellington, Deau Jacobs, Canon Wilson, Rev. Mr Thorpe, Sir W. Martin, Hon. J. B. Aoland, and Mr Hunter Brown, i ■ •• i CORRESPONDENCE WITtfEKV. D. M. STTJART. ..Mr, HtJuTjBR-j JBrown moved — "That the correspondence between the Rev. Mr Stuart, Minister of Kuox, Church, and the Primate, of .New . Zealand, rela> ive to one of the New Zealand .Bishops now in Dunedin, preaching in. JjCnox Church, Duoedin, be, laid pn table." The mover said he thought ...that such an important matter v as, the request mentioned iv his resolution should not be ( j allowed toj pass without , notice. He therefore deemed it, requisite that the letter making the request should be laid before them. It .was unseemly, he thought, that such an, important matter should be discussed at , street corners, at the Club, and'Vthjßt places,, ,and the Sjrnod should tiottjay, a vrord'upon the subject, nor even have it formally before them. He presumed, before the Synod separated, some motion with -reference to, the desirability of unior}; among the different Churches in New Zealand vould be brought forward ;.anjl, in the meantime.,, his motion would be the means of direct'^'aitebtiQiblAotEu'iDßailter. , '' The motion iseu»g ,aeconjcled, a discusjuoi^eusued afitjo.^e, wording of the resolution, ,the De*n of Chbi»tchuiioh suggesting *v alteration to tbe. effect th*fc

" the Bishops be requested to lay the Correspondence on the table." It being six o'clock, the discussion was postponed. COPYRIGHT OF NEW ZEALAND HYMNAL.

The Dean of Chbistchurch, in the absence of Mr Lusk, moved that the Bishop of Waiapu should be authorised to execute, on equitable conditions, the assignment of the copyright of the New Zealand Hymn Book to Messrs Collins, Sons, and Co.

After a lengthened discussion, it was resolved, at the suggestion of Canon Wilson, that the Primate, in conjunction with the Bishop of Waiapu and Archdeacon Stock, should be requested to charge themselves with the settlement of the proposed arrangement with Messrs Collins, Sons, and Co., and to take such legal advice as was necessary.

DISCIPLINE BILL.

The Dean of Christchurch moved the second reading of a Statute to define ecclesiastical offences, and the punishment thereof.

Seconded by Sir W. Martin, and carried.

The Synod then went into Committee on the measure. After the two first clauses were considered, progress was reported, and the Synod adjourned.

- --■- — - ■•■ - TSfik lto^Xn™* I®*l®* " **m l**