HL Deb 05 February 1855 vol 136 cc1269-70
THE EAEL OF SHAFTESBURY

wished to ask his right rev. Friend (the Archbishop of Canterbury) a question with respect to the meeting of Convocation, which was fixed for to-morrow. It was well known that that body was not authorised to enter upon the discussion of any business without the sanction of Her Majesty. Now, as there was at present no Minister through which that sanction could be conveyed, he wished to know whether it would not be desirable to adjourn to some future period, when a Minister should have been appointed by Her Majesty, who could be authorised by Her Majesty to give the necessary authority for the transaction of business.

THE ARCHBISHOP OF CANTERBURY

said, that he did not think it would be necessary either to prorogue or adjourn Convocation further; because it was not intended to initiate any new business, but simply to proceed with what had been commenced, and to consider the reports of Committees which had already been appointed.

THE BISHOP OF LONDON

said, that Convocation had at their previous meetings appointed Committees, who had prepared reports, which had been laid upon their Lordships' table, and the recommendations contained in which had received the almost unanimous assent of clergy of almost every shade of opinion. It was intended on the following day to consider, not whether it would be desirable to adopt the measures recommended in those reports, but simply whether Convocation would so far sanction them as to make them the basis of an Address to Her Majesty, praying Her to empower Convocation to deliberate upon them. He certainly thought they ought to be allowed, at any rate, so far to discuss the reports of their own Committees. He must say that, looking to the example afforded by the meetings of Convocation last year, and to the temperate conclusions to which they had conic, he did not think that any apprehensions could possibly be entertained with respect to the consequences of their meeting to-morrow.

Forward to