Responsible government in the Dominions: Responsible government in the Dominions

Responsible government in the Dominions (Vol. 3)

Bibliographic data

Multivolume work

Identifikator:: 1896933912

Document type:: Multivolume work

Author:: Keith, Arthur Berriedale http://d-nb.info/gnd/119086794

Title:: Responsible government in the Dominions

Place of publication:: Oxford

Publisher:: Clarendon Press

Year of publication:: 1912-

Collection:: Economics Books

Usage license:: Get license information via the feedback formular.

Volume

Identifikator:: 1896935311

URN:: urn:nbn:de:zbw-retromon-237672

Document type:: Volume

Author:: Keith, Arthur Berriedale http://d-nb.info/gnd/119086794

Title:: Responsible government in the Dominions

Volume count:: Vol. 3

Place of publication:: Oxford

Publisher:: Clarendon Pr.

Year of publication:: 1912

Scope:: XII Seiten, Seiten 1102-1670

Digitisation:: 2022

Collection:: Economics Books

Usage license:: Get license information via the feedback formular.

Chapter

Document type:: Multivolume work

Structure type:: Chapter

Title:: Part VII. The Church in the dominions

Collection:: Economics Books

1428 THE CHURCH IN THE DOMINIONS [PART VII offence as justified the sentence against him. The bishop had convened a synod, and Mr. Long was required to procure the election of a delegate for the parish. The Judicial Committee held that the bishop had no power to convene a synod without the sanction of the Crown or the Colonial Legislature, and therefore Mr. Long was justified in refusing to help to call the body into existence. The oath of obedience only referred to lawful commands. In giving judgement the Court said: ‘The Church of England, in places where there is no Church established by law, is in the same situation with any other religious body—in no better but in no worse position ; and the members may adopt, as the members of any other communion may adopt, rules for enforcing disci- pline within their body, which will be binding on those who expressly or by implication have assented to them.” The Court also held that even if Mr. Long had an appeal under the letters patent to the archbishop, which they did not decide, as the matter in respect of which the appeal was brought had to do with a temporal right, he was at liberty to resort to the Supreme Court of the Colony. This case was followed by the case in re The Lord Bishop of Natal! in which Dr. Colenso presented a petition to Her Majesty in Council alleging the nullity of a sentence of dis- possession for heresy pronounced against him by the Bishop of Cape Town as metropolitan of that diocese. In that case it was held by the Judicial Committee that the Letters Patent of 1853, which purported to subject the Bishop of Natal in ecclesiastical matters to the jurisdiction of the Bishop of Cape Town were ultra vires and of no effect whatever. Their decision was based on the fact that except in the case of a Colony in which the Crown had power to legislate, whether by the prerogative to legislate for a con- quered or ceded Colony, or whether it had power to legislate under such an Act as that of 18432 regarding the West African settlements and the Falkland Islands, the King could not set up by letters patent a metropolitan see or province, or create an ecclesiastical corporation, whose status rights ! 3 Moo. P. C. (N. 8.) 115. Cf. Bishop of Capetown v. Bishop of Natal, 3P C. 1. * See now British Settlements Act, 1887.

Access restriction

Copyright

fullscreen: Responsible government in the Dominions (Vol. 3)

Multivolume work

Volume

Chapter

Table of contents

Download

Volume

Chapter

This page

Image fragment

Citation links

Citation recommendation