part of the difficulty was overcome. If the colonial clergy, by merely taking the oath of canonical obedience to a bishop, have in fact subjected themselves to the entire body of ecclesiastical law, then it can no longer be said that the condition of the Church is one of anarchy. The bishop must then be taken to be vested with episcopal authority in spiritual matters, to which authority all the clergy who acknowledge obedience to him are canonically bound to submit, as long as such authority is lawfully exercised. But this definition of his powers evidently leaves a wide margin for discussion, and for the ultimate intervention of the Civil Courts; and every one knows, in practice, how impossible it is to rest so enormous a superstructure on so narrow a basis. The attempt would only produce more litigation than it would extinguish. And, even if this were otherwise, the establishment of ecclesiastical law is not what is wanted, but the power to form a government and a legislature which shall suit themselves to the altered wants of our times. This, it seems, can hardly be done except by calling in the aid of the law in the shape of some enactment, either colonial or parliamentary. It may be the due Nemesis for past centuries of oppression, but we confess there is to us something of humiliation in the spectacle now too often witnessed of whole communities of our brethren, members of the Church of England in the colonies, vainly besieging the doors of local legislatures, composed of men of other persuasions, and either indifferent or actuated by the lingering spirit of ancient hostility, not to ask for exclusive rights or privileges, but merely for power to govern themselves. And even if this road to justice were less obstructed, it behoves us as churchmen to have our eyes open to another danger.. If the Church of England, in every colony, is to have her synodical government constituted according to the will of the legislature of that colony, uniformity of government will be difficult to maintain, and yet on this uniformity of doctrine and discipline will be found mainly to depend. Far better would it be for the Church-far better, in truth, for all parties concerned-if Parliament would do what it was invited to do in 1854, and pass, once for all, an organic law, enabling the Anglicans of every colony to frame for themselves the polity under which their church is to subsist. Whether the governing body so to be constituted should, or should not, have power to alter the fundamental laws of our Church as established by the Act of Uniformity-should have power, in other words, to break off communion with the Church at home if it pleased-is a serious question, on which we will not now enter. Not the slightest encroachment on the independence of the colonial legislatures need be effected by such enactment, for it should be carefully provided that every such legislature should have the amplest power to alter, or, if necessary, to repeal, the enactment itself. No one wishes to force the consent of those local legislatures. All that is desired is, to set the machine in motion. But we fear that all such suggestions are in truth unavailing. The broad maxim, that Parliament is not to legislate for the colonies, will override all exceptional projects, however reasonable in themselves. It will override them, partly through a righteous deference to constitutional principles, much more because no British Government, constituted as governments now are, will dare to confront possible enmities for the sake of so remote and unpractical an interest as that of ecclesiastical administration. Meanwhile the episcopal authorities can but struggle on to the best of their ability, substituting the machinery of persuasion and consent for that of established jurisdiction. And if it is abundantly necessary that they should remember how unfitting arrogant pretensions or rash attempts to extend their sphere of action are in the case. of functionaries so slenderly armed with power as themselves, much more should their subordinates be on their guard against allowing the spirit of opposition, or the pride of independence, or self-will in things indifferent, to set them in hostility to rulers who so peculiarly stand in need of affectionate support and encouragement. No. CCXLIII. will be published in January, 1864. INDEX. A Antiquity of Man, 254. See Lyell. Architecture, Modern Styles of, 71-Mr. Fergusson's history, 71. B Blanc, M. L., Histoire de la Révolution Française, reviewed, 101. C Chinchona, Cultivation of, in India, 507-Peruvian bark, 509- Claverhouse, Memorials of, 1-Sharpe's, Mr., 3-Claverhouse's first D Druids and Bards, 40-Druidical hierarchy, 45-Higgins' specula- E Episcopate, Colonial, the, 552-question of Episcopacy, 553- F Fergusson, James, his Modern Styles of Architecture, reviewed, 71— sance, its tendency, 81-St. Peter's, 84-St. Paul's, 85-domical G Grant, Capt. A., his Ethnological Papers reviewed, 207. Gregorovius, F., his Geschichte der Stadt Rom im Mittelalter, 342— H Hawkins, Rev. E., his Colonial Bishoprics, reviewed, 552. Howard, J. E., his Report on the Bark and Leaves of Chinchona J James, Col. Sir H., his Extension of the Triangulation of the Ord- K Kinglake, Mr., note on his Invasion of the Crimea, 303. L Lang, Dr. J. D., his Queensland, reviewed, 305. Lewis, Sir G. C., his best Form of Government, reviewed, 138-his Lyell, Sir C., his Geological Evidences of the Antiquity of Man, 254 |