Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

appeals to George IV. to recognize that claim, and then, when George III., Lord Warwick, and the Duke of Kent were dead, she brought forward the present claim, and supported it by the documents now produced. In each of the claims which she made at different times, she appealed to documents in her possession by which they were supported. What was the irresistible inference? Why, that documents were from time to time prepared to meet the form which her claims from time to time assumed. A great deal had been said about different members of the Royal Family having countenanced and supported this lady. He could quite understand, if an appeal was made on her behalf as an illegitimate daughter of the Duke of Cumberland, that a generous-minded prince might say, “ As you have our blood flowing in your veins, you shall not be left in want and penury;" and very likely papers might have been shown to some members of the Royal Family in support of that claim, which they believed to be genuine. It was just as easy to fabricate papers showing her illegitimacy as to fabricate those now produced, and probably such papers would not be very rigorously scrutinized and criticized. But it was not possible to believe that the documents now produced (including the Hannah Lightfoot certificates) had been shown to members of the Royal Family and pronounced by them to be genuine. He could not understand why the secret was to be kept after the Duke of Cumberland's death, when there was no longer any danger that he would incur the risk of punishment for bigamy, and why the death of George III. should be fixed upon as the time for disclosing it. The death of George III. was the very time when it would become important to keep the secret; for if it had been then disclosed, it would have shown that neither George IV. nor the Duke of Kent were entitled to succeed to the throne. Why, then, should the Duke of Kent stipulate for the keeping of the secret until George III. died? They must look at all the circumstances of the case, and say whether they believed the documents produced by the petitioner to be genuine.

The Lord Chief Baron: As you stopped the Attorney-General, gentlemen, I don't very well see how you can find against him without hearing his case to the end.

The jury, without hesitation, found that they were not satisfied that Olive Serres, the mother of Mrs. Ryves, was the legitimate daughter of Henry Frederick, Duke of Cumberland, and Olive his wife ; and that they were not satisfied that Henry Frederick, Duke of Cumberland, was lawfully married to Olive Wilmot on the 4th of March, 1767. The other issues, affirming that Mrs. Ryves was the legitimate daughter of Mr. and Mrs. Serres, and that W. H. Ryves was the legitimate son of Mr. and Mrs. Ryves, they found for the petitioners.

The Attorney-General: I should state that we were prepared to prove that Dr. Wilmot was at Oxford on the day of the pretended marriage, and that Lord Warwick used the name of Greville, and not that of Brooke, up to the time when be succeeded to the earldom.

Mr. W. Smith said he was prepared to controvert those facts.

On the motion of the Attorney-General, the Court ordered the documents produced by the petitioners to be impounded.

Thus ended this extraordinary trial.

Not the least curious part of the case was, that if Mrs. Ryves had succeeded in making out that her mother was a Royal Princess, she would have established at the same time her own illegitimacy. The alleged marriage of the Duke of Cumberland was celebrated before the Royal Marriage Act; and consequently, if Mrs. Serres had been the Duke's daughter, she would have been a Princess of the Blood Royal. But that Act had been passed before her marriage with Mr. Serres, and would have rendered it invalid, so that her issue would have been illegitimate. As it was, Mrs. Ryves obtained a declaration of her legitimacy, but at the cost of her pretended Royal descent. It is possible, as the Attorney-General said, that she, like her mother, may have brooded over the story till she persuaded herself it was true; but it was unpardonable that more responsible persons should ha abetted her in the delusion. As the story, however, was brought so prominently forward, it is satisfactory that it has been so thoroughly exposed. It will only be remembered for the future as an extraordinary monument of the ingenuity and perverted industry which may be exerted by vanity and madness.

II.

THE CASE OF DR. COLENSO, BISHOP OF NATAL.

PAYMENT OF INCOME OF SEE.

THE BISHOP OF NATAL V. THE RIGHT Hon. W. E. GLADSTONE AND OTHERS.

A suit of considerable interest in its bearing on the question of the Colonial Episcopate was decided by the Master of the Rolls. The proceeding arose out of the judgment of the Privy Council on the “ Colenso case in March, 1865"judgment of which the effect was to disturb almost all received opinions as to the constitutional position of the Colonial Church. The Judicial Committee of the Privy Council did not, indeed, negative the right of Bishop Colenso to assume the Episcopal character, or that of Bishop Gray to call himself Metropolitan of the South African Church, whatever spiritual authority such titles may import; but they denied that any coercive jurisdiction could be exercised by either, inasmuch as the patents which purported to confer that jurisdiction were null and void in law. They declared that “there was no power in the Crown, by virtue of its prerogative, to establish a metropolitan see or province, or to create an ecclesiastical corporation whose status, rights, and authority the colony should be bound to recognize.” “It may be true that the Crown, as legal hea of the Church, has a right to command the consecration of a Bishop, but it has no power to assign him any diocese, or give him any sphere of action," either within the United Kingdom or within any colony which has received legislative institutions, unless by special provisions of an Act of Parliament. Upon the delivery of this judgment Bishop Colenso applied to the trustees of the "Colonial Bishoprics Fund” for the arrears of the income annually payable out of that fund to the Bishopric of Natal, which had been withheld and carried to a separate account since his illegal deposition in the previous year. The trustees, however, among whom were the Archbishop of Canterbury, Mr. Gladstone, Vice-Chancellor Page Wood, and Mr. Hubbard, took a different view of their duty. They contended that, inasmuch as Bishop Colenso was not a suffragan Bishop within the Province of Cape Town, he was not a Bishop at all in the sense contemplated by the original promoters of the fund, and could receive no benefit from it. Bishop Colenso therefore sought redress from the Court of Chancery, and the matter having been argued before Lord Romilly, that learned judge delivered his decision on the 6th of November as follows:

He said that it was a suit instituted by Dr. Colenso, as Bishop of Natal, against the treasurers of the Colonial Bishoprics Fund, praying that the annual income derivable from that fund and appropriated to the endowment of the Bishopric of Natal might be paid over to him as Bishop, the same having been for some time withheld. The defendants, as treasurers of the fund in question, resisted Dr. Colenso's claim, on the ground that the fund was entrusted to them for the payment of a Bishop of quite a different stamp from Dr. Colenso; that the decision of the Privy Council in the case of “ Dr. Colenso v. the Bishop of Cape Town” had established that such an office as Dr. Colenso held was not such a bishopric as the subscribers to the Colonial Fund contemplated or were willing to endow; and that the council of and subscribers to the Colonial Bishoprics Fund had been misled as to the powers of the letters patent appointing the Bishop of Natal,—inasmuch as they thought they were procuring the establish. ment of a colonial bishopric with full ecclesiastical jurisdiction (the same as an English bishopric), and subject to complete metropolitan supervision and control. The facts of the case were as follows :—In the early part of the year 1841 the Archbishop of Canterbury issued an invitation to the clergy and laity to attend a meeting for the purpose of creating a fund for the endowment of additional bishoprics in our colonies, and to remedy the defective provisions previously existing for planting the Church in the distant dependencies of the British empire, and extending to them the full benefit of apostolical government and discipline. In obedience to this invitation a meeting was held on the 27th of April, 1841, in Willis’s Rooms, at which resolutions were passed to the effect " that the want of episcopal superintendence was a great and acknowledged defect in the religious provisions hitherto made for many of the colonies and dependencies of the British Crown; that a fund should be raised towards providing for the endowments of bishoprics in such of the foreign possessions of Great Britain as should be determined upon by the Archbishops and Bishops of the United Church of England and Ireland; and that their lordships should be requested to undertake the charge and application of the fund, and to name treasurers and such other officers as might be required for conducting the necessary details.” On the Tuesday following this meeting the Archbishops and Bishops undertook to take charge of the fund, and appointed a committee of Bishops to arrange measures for the erection of additional colonial bishoprics. On the 18th of May, 1849, it was determined by special resolution that henceforward all the Archbishops and Bishops of the Church of England and Ireland should form the committee, which should be called “The Council for Colonial Bishoprics,” and that the present defendants, among others, should be appointed treasurers to the council. In March, 1853, the council determined to appoint four new colonial bisbopries, of which the province of Natal was to be one, and in November of that year, the council having previously stipulated for the due endowment of the bishopric of Natal out of its fund, so far as was consonant with its power, Her Majesty by letters patent erected the province of Natal into a separate see and diocese, appointed Dr. Colenso to be ordained and consecrated Bishop thereof, desired the Archbishop of Canterbury to ordain and consecrate Dr. Colenso to such see in the accustomed manner, and declared that Dr. Colenso, after having been so ordained and consecrated, might, by virtue of such appointment and consecration, enter into and possess the see of Natal for the term of his natural life. On the 30th of the same month of November Dr. Colenso was duly ordained and consecrated, and shortly afterwards proceeded to Natal, and took possession of his bishopric. In the making of this appointment it was formally provided that the bishopric of Natal was to be under the metropolitan supervision of the Bishop of Cape Town, and that Dr. Colenso, as Bishop of Natal, was to take oath to obey the Bishop of Cape Town as his Metropolitan. From the month of November, 1853, until the month of April, 1864, the treasurers of the Council for Colonial Bishoprics duly paid Dr. Colenso his salary (6621.) as Bishop of Natal; but since the latter period they refused to continue payment of such salary, baving received a notification from the Bishop of Cape Town that he had, on account of certain heretical doctrines, deprived Dr. Colenso of his post as Bishop of Natal; and Dr. Colenso's salary had ever since been withheld by the council, and carried to a separate account. In the month of March, 1865, Dr. Colenso having appealed to the Crown against the decision of the Bishop of Cape Town, and brought the matter before the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council, that Court decided in favour of Dr. Colenso and against the Bishop of Cape Town, whose decree of deprivation, as against Dr. Colenso as Bishop of Natal, the Privy Council declared to be null and void. On obtaining this decree of the Privy Council in his favour, Dr. Colenso, as Bishop of Natal, applied to the treasurers of the Colonial Bishoprics Fund for the payment of his salary, which had been withheld; but the treasurers of such fund refused to make such payment, alleging that, according to the decision of the Privy Council, Dr. Colenso was not such a Bishop as the subscribers to the Colonial Bishoprics Fund intended to endow; that, according to such decision, the letters patent had no right to create him such a Bishop; that the Bishop of Natal, according to the decision of the Privy Council, had no such pastoral care over his clergy, and was under no such supervision of his metropolitan as the Colonial Bishoprics Council contemplated and intended that he and their other colonial Bishops should be. Upon the treasurers of the Colonial Fund persisting in their refusal to pay Dr. Colenso his salary or to recognize his claim as Bishop of Natal, Dr. Colenso had instituted the present proceedings against them; and the issue which this Court had to decide was whether or not they were bound to pay him. In deciding this issue the Court was not called upon to pronounce any opinion as to the nature or character of Dr. Colenso's doctrines, or whether or not some of his works might be heretical or otherwise ; all that the Court was called upon to pronounce an opinion on, was the force of the letters patent under which Dr. Colenso was appointed. What the letters patent had done was, to appoint Dr. Colenso Bishop of Natal, and to desire the Archbishop of Canterbury to ordain him as such. The Archbishop had so ordained him, and Dr. Colenso was a duly appointed titular Bishop. By such appointment Dr. Colenso had full episcopal powers over his clergy and flock, subject to the restriction that such power could only be enforced by resort to the civil tribunals. The Bishop of Natal had, in fact, much the same power over his clergy in Natal as an English bishop had over his clergy in England, the main difference being, that the Bishop of Natal's order must be entirely resisted, according to the civil tribunals, with power to appeal to the Queen in Council. Dr. Colenso was created a titular Bishop all the world over, and a territorial Bishop within the province of Natal. The law, as laid down by the Privy Council in these cases, instead of uprooting the colonial Churches, as branches of the Church of England, would do much to establish them. The Privy Council had laid it down as a rule that the Church of England in our colonies was a voluntary association, or, in other words, that, where there was no State religion in a colony, a few members

having been argued before Lord Romilly, that learned judge delivered his decision on the 6th of November as follows:

He said that it was a suit instituted by Dr. Colenso, as Bishop of Natal, against the treasurers of the Colonial Bishoprics Fund, praying that the annual income derivable from that fund and appropriated to the endowment of the Bishopric of Natal might be paid over to him as Bishop, the same having been for some time withheld. The defendants, as treasurers of the fund in question, resisted Dr. Colenso's claim, on the ground that the fund was entrusted to them for the payment of a Bishop of quite a different stamp from Dr. Colenso; that the decision of the Privy Council in the case of “ Dr. Colenso v. the Bishop of Cape Town" had established that such an office as Dr. Colenso held was not such a bishopric as the subscribers to the Colonial Fund contemplated or were willing to endow; and that the council of and subscribers to the Colonial Bishoprics Fund had been misled as to the powers of the letters patent appointing the Bishop of Natal,—inasmuch as they thought they were procuring the establishment of a colonial bishopric with full ecclesiastical jurisdiction (the same as an English bishopric), and subject to complete metropolitan supervision and control. The facts of the case were as follows:-In the early part of the year 1841 the Archbishop of Canterbury issued an invitation to the clergy and laity to attend a meeting for the purpose of creating a fund for the endowment of additional bishoprics in our colonies, and to remedy the defective provisions previously existing for planting the Church in the distant dependencies of the British empire, and extending to them the full benefit of apostolical government and discipline. In obedience to this invitation meeting was held on the 27th of April, 1841, in Willis's Rooms, at which resolutions were passed to the effect " that the want of episcopal superintendence was a great and acknowledged defect in the religious provisions hitherto made for many of the colonies and dependencies of the British Crown; that a fund should be raised towards providing for the endowments of bishoprics in such of the foreign possessions of Great Britain as should be determined upon by the Archbishops and Bishops of the United Church of England and Ireland; and that their lordships should be requested to undertake the charge and application of the fund, and to name treasurers and such other officers as might be required for conducting the necessary details.” On the Tuesday following this meeting the Archbishops and Bishops undertook to take charge of the fund, and appointed a committee of Bishops to arrange measures for the erection of additional colonial bishoprics. On the 18th of May, 1849, it was determined by special resolution that henceforward all the Archbishops and Bishops of the Church of England and Ireland should form the committee, which should be called “The Council for Colonial Bishoprics," and that the present defendants, among others, should be appointed treasurers to the council. In March, 1853, the council determined to appoint four new colonial bishoprics, of which the province of Natal was to be one, and in November of that year, the council having previously stipulated for the due endowment of the bishoprio of Natal out of its fund, so far as was consonant with its power, Her Majesty by letters patent erected the province of Natal into a separate see and diocese, appointed Dr. Colenso to be ordained and consecrated Bishop thereof, desired the Archbishop of Canterbury to ordain and consecrate Dr. Colenso to such see in the accustomed manner, and declared that Dr. Colenso, after having been so ordained and consecrated, might, by virtue of such appointment and consecration, enter into and possess the see of Natal for the term of his natural life. On the 30th of the same month of November Dr. Colenso was

« AnteriorContinuar »