Mr. Bouverie is reported to have said that

"The judges were appointed by the Bishops, and it was "entirely in the power of the Bishops what should be the "duration and amount of the authority delegated to them."

This is, as my reader will now be prepared to expect, another blunder. Bishops have no such power. The patent of the last Chancellor is transferred to his successor, and when confirmed, as it always is, by the Dean and Chapter, conveys a freehold to the holder, who cannot be removed by the Bishop or his successor: so that the true proposition is, "it is not in the power of the "Bishops what should be the duration and amount "of the authority delegated to them."

Again, Mr. Bouverie is reported to have said—

"As for the origin of these courts, they were the purest "relics of Papal authority existing in this country,—the "monument of the great struggle for temporal domination "which was carried on previous to the Reformation. The "Bishops at the Reformation, in the great scramble for "the property and authority of the Church, picked up "and appropriated this portion of the Pope's power; and they had acted out what was said to be the true prin

66

ciple for a good judge-that of extending his jurisdic❝tion, for they did all they could, in the early period after "the Reformation, to extend the authority of these courts "to every thing cognizable in the ordinary courts; and, "but for the firmness of Coke and his brother judges, "they would probably have succeeded. From that time, "indeed, to the present, there had been a constant cur"rent of complaint against the abuses and maladministra"tion in the Ecclesiastical Courts."

power

at

Bad history and very indifferent law are the principal features of this passage. It might as well be said that the Archbishopric of Canterbury is "a pure relic of Papal authority." The Bishops did not " pick up and appropriate" this the Reformation. They had always appointed learned civilians and canonists to be their Chancellors, and always had Diocesan Courts. The Peculiars were Papal exemptions from the authority of the Bishops' Courts.

As to the conduct of Lord Coke, Mr. Bouverie must have forgotten that this bitter enemy of every thing but the feudal law of England, of which he was a perfect master, this honest but most narrow-minded and illiberal man, who called the all-accomplished Raleigh "a spider of Hell," this hater of Lord Bacon and Courts of Equity, as well as of Ecclesiastical Jurisprudence, -did lay down as law, with respect to Prohibitions to Ecclesiastical Courts, various important doctrines which have been since completely overruled as bad law by his successors. To say that "from that time there has been a constant current of complaint against Ecclesiastical Courts," -if this be meant for an argument, is it to say more than might be said of the other Courts of Justice to which it is proposed to transfer their jurisdiction? When Hamlet complained of "the law's delay," he was not alluding to the object of Mr. Bouverie's attack.

Is the view which I have taken of the advantage and usefulness of the jurisdiction of the Diocesan Courts a mere fine-spun theory, is it a scheme dictated by interest and prejudice? I say it is supported by the highest and the best authority. Who knew better the various modes of administering justice in the different tribunals of this country, who brought a richer experience or a sharper wit to bear upon a question of a mixed legal and constitutional character than Lord Chancellor Lyndhurst? He moreover had seen the fate of various Ecclesiastical Courts Bills; and in 1844 he took this difficult and intricate matter, so to speak, into his own hands. Hear his matured opinion upon this branch of my subject:

"There was really something whimsical in the "course which was pursued by those persons who were opposed to the continuance of the Diocesan "Courts; he heard on every side clamours for

66

66

local tribunals,-for bringing justice to every "man's door. Here they found a system established, and they were asked to proceed in an "inverted order and to abolish these Courts. In"stead of altering these local tribunals they should "endeavour to reform them:-make the experi"ment. As wise statesmen and legislators they "should not overturn that which was established "until they were satisfied that they could substi"tute for the existing system something better. "He had had some experience-he had seen sys

66

"tems overturned and other systems adopted in "lieu of them; but in few instances had been "realized the views of those who supported the "alterations. Such was the infirmity of human nature, difficulties, objections and obstructions "which had not been guarded against were found "to attach themselves to the new system, which I generally in its details was found to work imperfectly and disjointedly, and the measures "which were found necessary to adjust it, the "trouble, the time, the expense and the anxiety, "if applied to the old system which had been subverted, would, in most cases, have accomplished the object more completely, more satis'factorily, and, in all probability, with less trouble " and expense."

66

66

And again," he advised them not to do so "without exercising the utmost caution: and "above all not to attempt it unless they were fully satisfied, after the most careful and dili

66

gent inquiry into the subject, that the establish"ment of the Diocesan Courts, on an enlarged "and improved footing, was not advantageous to "the community, and that their jurisdictions, by the appointment of able judges, were not capable of being made fit instruments in the discharge of their duty, namely, in administering properly the ecclesiastical law of the country."

66

*Hansard's Parl. Debates (March, 1844), vol. 73, pp. 13-19.

I am afraid, if this advice be despised, it will be found, when the mischief has been done, that "old experience did attain

To something of prophetic strain.”

CONNECTION OF THE DIOCESAN COURTS WITH THE CHURCH AND THE CLERGY.

This matter of the Diocesan Court is closely and immediately connected with the very important question of the discipline of the Church, especially as it relates to the Clergy.

Upon this subject Mr. Bouverie is reported to have said,-.

"There was only one point upon which their recom"mendations had been attended to, and that was with

respect to the jurisdiction of these Courts regarding dis"cipline and correction of manners of the clergy,-the "only particular in which the jurisdiction affected the "Bishops themselves, and where they found, to their in"jury, the expensiveness and dilatoriness and inefficiency "of their own Courts. In that particular they induced "Parliament to assent to a measure which took them out "of the jurisdiction of their own Courts. For the Clergy "Discipline Act, 3 & 4 Victoria, cap. 86, provided 'that no criminal suit or proceeding against a clerk in holy "orders of the United Church of England and Ireland, "for any offence against the laws ecclesiastical, shall be "instituted in any Ecclesiastical Court otherwise than is "hereinbefore enacted or provided.'"

The fact is true; but it is so carelessly stated as almost inevitably to mislead those who heard it.

The natural inference from this statement would be, that the Bishops, having succeeded in abolish