ARCHDEACON HALE-I second the motion.

Orders.

CANON WOODGATE-I do not exactly agree with Dr. Jelf in the remarks which he has made as to the former disorderly character of the house. I feel bound to make this remark out of respect for the late Prolocutor, who ruled the house with a rod of iron.

DR. JELF-It is unnecessary for me to say that I entertain the utmost respect for the memory of the late Prolocutor, and do not wish to cast any stigma on the house. If I said one word that could imply a stigma on the meetings of Convocation, I at once retract it. The want of order to which I referred was perfectly unavoidable in an assembly of this description on its first meeting.

SIR GEORGE PREVOST-According to the recommendation of the committee, there is to be no debate on a moton for the suspension of the standing orders. I wish to know whether any person moving the suspension of the standing orders is to do so without stating his reasons?

The PROLOCUTOR-No. An illustration of the mode of proceeding that may be adopted occurred yesterday, when Archdeacon Denison moved the suspension of the standing orders. A motion may be made for their suspension, in order, if carried, to introduce a motion, which may be specified. The house will then be in possession of the reason, and if they wish to entertain the motion, they will say "Aye."

CANON SELWYN-What course is to be adopted with respect to the reception of reports from committees?

The PROLOCUTOR-No alteration is proposed with regard to such reports.

CANON SELWYN-I think the course pursued by the committee is fully borne out by the remarks of the late Prolocutor, who, in the year 1852, impressed on Convocation the necessity of having its rules of proceeding clearly defined.

The REV. W. S. BEST-I wish to know by what agency the selection is to be made. Is it to be made by a committee?

DR. JELF-That matter is left entirely for the consideration of the house. No doubt there must be some agency, and perhaps a committee of selection may be satisfactory.

ARCHDEACON DENISON-No, no.

The PROLOCUTOR-There is no selection talked of or contemplated. It would be the worst course to pursue to allow the standing orders to be set aside, in order that some member may select such subjects as he thinks proper. It is left to the house to say whether a measure is of such consequence as to justify a departure from the standing orders. I hope the house will consider the standing orders a discipline on themselves, that they will be anxious to avoid breaking in on that discipline, and will only do so when a member states that some motion ought to be brought forward on account of its great importance. That is the only kind of selection contemplated.

The REV. W. S. BEST-In my opinion the business of the house would be very much facilitated by a committee selecting those matters which are of acknowledged importance, and giving them precedence over theoretical discussions.

Orders.

The PROLOCUTOR-The question of a committee of selection was proposed and considered, and the reason why it was set aside was simply this that as the majority in the house could scarcely fail to supply the majority in the committee, the whole control over the motions to be entertained in the house would virtually reside in the majority. At present any person, being member of a very small minority, or even standing by himself, could take his place on the list whenever he chose, and the consideration of his motion could only be evaded or excluded by an act of such gross injustice, as Convocation would scarce permit itself to perpetrate.

The REV. W. S. BEST-I bow to the decision which has been just expressed. I will only say that many of the resolutions on the paper may be considered as dead, and that there are several which will bring on the same discussion three or four times. It was only for the purpose of saving time, and insuring practical discussion, that I wished for the appointment of a committee of selection.

The PROLOCUTOR-One word more. No difficulty will arise when there are several motions on the same subject; for Mr. Best will observe, that the very first motion that is brought on will allow the introduction of the others by way of amendment.

ARCHDEACON RANDALL-If I understand rightly, any member who moves the suspension of the standing orders must confine himself strictly to a statement of the motion which he intends to submit to the house.

LORD A. COMPTON-I would suggest to the house whether it has a right to adopt such a regulation. We are sent up by large bodies, and are intrusted with the gravamina of those whom we represent, and I wish to know whether it is constitutional and right, if such gravamina are presented, for the house not to allow them to be taken to the other house.

The PROLOCUTOR-That point has also been considered. There can be no doubt that the refusal to send a gravamen to the other house does not exclude any clergyman from taking it there in some other shape. All clergymen have access to the other house by their diocesan, or in some other way. Therefore, excluding a clergyman from calling upon the Prolocutor to take up his gravamen, does not exclude him from presenting that gravamen to the Upper House. Petitions or gravamina may be presented of such a character as the house will not sanction. If the Prolocutor, for instance, should find one against the prerogative of the Crown, he might, by receiving it, be brought under one of the canons, and render himself liable to excommunication. Therefore a licence ought to be granted to the Prolocutor to determine whether he will become a particeps criminis.

CANON WORDSWORTH-I cannot help thinking that the question raised by Lord A. Compton is a most important one, because it seems in some degree to infringe upon the very constitution of Convocation, which consists of one house, with the Bishops sitting in another place. It seems to me, on that principle-which is a fundamental principlethat every member has access, not merely to the Lower House itself, but has access to the other, through their organ the Prolocutor. That

is a point which I will not now insist upon; but I submit to the house that there are authorities to corroborate that position, inasmuch as Convocation is only one house, one portion of it sitting in the Jerusalem Chamber and the other at the Bounty Board, and that the Lower House has access to the Archbishop through the Prolocutor, who is the representative of the Archbishop. Although I have listened with delight to Dr. Jelf's lucid statement, and cordially thank him on the part of the house generally for the spirit which has characterised that speech, still, although for the purpose of economising time it might be desirable to render the rules of the house very stringent, I should be sorry to renounce or abandon one of those privileges of which we are not the possessors but the guardians. I hope that the Convocation of England, which has existed for five centuries, will exist for five centuries more. The privilege now under consideration is the inheritance of the house. Bishop Gibson, who is the best authority on the subject, states that it is the right of the clergy of the Lower House to lay before their lordships in the other house an account of any disorderly persons or practices that they know, either by schedules or vivá voce by the Prolocutor, and that these schedules are to be considered by his Grace and their lordships, with a view to reformanda. This is a point on which the Lower House had a discussion, and a most amicable one, with the other house, during the last session. Some schedules were presented which it was thought right to send to the Upper House. At first the Archbishop, after consulting his legal adviser, demurred to the reception of these schedules; but he afterwards revised that opinion, and said that, inasmuch as the schedules appeared as reformanda, he could not refuse to accept them. As that principle is sanctioned by the best authorities, the house ought not to renounce it by a side wind, but to guard it with jealousy and scrupulosity, and transmit it unimpaired to their successors. I would suggest to the house the propriety of embodying the principle enunciated by Bishop Gibson as one of the standing orders, declaring that every member of the house has a right to lay before their lordships in the other house an account of any disorderly practices or persons, either vivá voce by the Prolocutor or in schedules, and that no debate be allowed to take place in this house as to the merits of the said schedules.

The PROLOCUTOR-The recommendation before the house is thisthat a gravamen may, unless the house object, be carried up by the Prolocutor to his Grace the President. The question is, whether the house will allow the words, "unless the house object," to remain in the standing order.

The REV. G. E. GILLETT-I think great inconvenience would arise if individual members were obliged to go to the Upper House to present their own schedules of gravamina. They have the right to send them up through the Prolocutor in their own name. No responsibility rests upon the Prolocutor or the house if they are merely taken up as the individual representation of the Proctor. Although I can conceive it possible that improper schedules may sometimes be presented, such cases will be extremely rare.

Orders. S

The PROLOCUTOR-If it is the understanding of the house, that I incur no responsibility, I am ready to act on the statement of the house, that such gravamina may be carried up by the Prolocutor to his Grace the President.

DR. JELF-I quite concur in that understanding.

ARCHDEACON DENISON-The committee were evidently contemplating something so heinously improper that the house might say, "We will have nothing to do with it."

CHANCELLOR MARTIN-Perhaps the objection might be got rid of by simply stating that the communication of such gravamina to the other house by the Prolocutor shall not imply any sanction of the house to such gravamina.

The REV. J. W. JOYCE-I wish the house to be aware of one circumstance before they preclude an individual Proctor from taking a gravamen up to the other house himself. From time immemorial it has been the right of each individual Proctor to take his own gravamen to his Grace. We are supposed to be sitting as a body, and each individual clerk sent from the country may present to his Grace a gravamen either from himself or his constituents. The house ought to think. gravely before sanctioning any departure from such a course.

CANON SELWYN-The words which Canon Wordsworth quoted from Bishop Gibson do not exactly correspond with my edition. The Bishop does not say that any member has a right to present his own gravamen. The words are, "And this, either vivá voce by the Prolocutor, or in schedules put into the Prolocutor's hands." The present proposition is the assertion of a new privilege, which has never yet been enjoyed by members of this house.

The words, "unless the house object," were then struck out, and words carrying out the suggestion of Chancellor Martin were inserted. The REV. J. W. JOYCE-I now propose the insertion of the following words:" or may be carried up to his Grace by the individual member himself presenting it." I consider that an inherent right of the house.

The PROLOCUTOR-I consider such a proposition something like an attempt to induce the house to recognise a privilege for individuals, and that it is neither more nor less than an endeavour to make a standing order for the other house.

The REV. F. C. MASSINGBERD—I may be permitted to observe that on the 12th of February last certain gravamina were brought in, and a motion was made that they should be taken up as the gravamina of the house. Another gravamen was introduced by myself, but I did not make any motion, and merely said, "I request you will transmit it to his Grace the President." I may be wrong, but I acted under the impression that I had the right to make that request. That course was adopted. The Prolocutor's observation on that occasion seemed to imply that he thought the consent of the house was necessary, for his words (as reported in the Chronicle of Convocation) were, "Unless the house interposes an objection, I shall take up this gravamen to the Upper House as that of Mr. Massingberd." The last thing I should think of would be to dispute the authority of the Prolocutor, but I was

F

Missions.

under the impression that I had the right, without asking the permisIsion of the house. As the standing order is drawn up, there is a restrictive clause at the end which will deprive members of that right.

The REV. J.S.H. HORNER-According to the statement of Mr. Joyce, a great question of privilege is involved in this standing order, and if so the house ought to be well informed before coming to any decision. I would suggest that the matter be referred to the committee of privileges.

The PROLOCUTOR-We know that when the house does not sanction schedules, they do find their way to the Upper House. How they happen to do so it is not necessary for us to inquire; but there can be no doubt as to the fact.

The amendment of Mr. Joyce was put and negatived.

ARCHDEACON GRANT-I beg to move that Clause 3 of the Standing Orders do read thus:

The house may, if it deems the motion to be of sufficient urgency and importance, decide that it may be discussed with a view to its adoption if approved of after discussion by the house without passing through the committee of gravamina; but that in regard to the first and third modes of procedure, the question as to which shall be adopted shall be decided without debate, the sense of the house being at once taken, "Aye" or "No."

DR. JELF-I second the motion.

The motion was put and agreed to.

The recommendations of the committee, with some verbal amendments, were adopted as standing orders.

HOME AND FOREIGN MISSIONS.

The consideration of the Report of the Committee on Home and Foreign Missions was then resumed.

The REV. P. C. CLAUGHTON-I propose the insertion of the following words after the last paragraph adopted yesterday :

We should greatly desire that additional encouragement should be afforded to the clergy for undertaking missionary or colonial work for limited periods, as well as for life; and in furtherance of this object we would suggest that, under due safeguards, additional facilities should be offered to clergymen who have served in foreign stations for obtaining employment in England on their return.

There are two special cases which will fall under this clause. Persons not in holy orders will sometimes be willing to take a title for three or four years for missionary work, and then return home, and by this clause they will be placed in a better position for finding employment at home. There are also cases where a beneficed clergyman would be exceedingly thankful, if he were able, either by having his living held for him, or by a dispensation for non-residence, to be allowed to devote himself to missionary work for three or four years. I think such cases would be provided for by the words I have suggested.

CHANCELLOR MARTIN-I second the motion.

ARCHDEACON HALE-I have prepared an amendment which does not keep out of sight the rights of the colonial clergy. It is to this effect:-We are also of opinion that if a certain number of benefices