§ MR. CATHCART WASON (Orkney and Shetland)I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies if he is aware that 769 in 1872 in South Australia an Act was pissed depriving the Bishop of the precedence he then possessed and disallowed by the Home Government, the then Secretary for the Colonies laying down the rule that a precedence once granted to a person could not be taken away during the time he held office, unless he voluntarily relinquished it; and, if so, whether he will state on what grounds and at whose instance the Chief Justice of New Zealand was deprived of his precedence.
§ MR. LYTTELTONThe circumstances of the two cases are somewhat different, as in the South Australian case the Bill in question had special reference to the precedence of certain ministers of religion, whereas in the New Zealand case it was a question of a general revision of the precedence table of the colony. Some doubts were at first entertained as to the propriety of making any alteration in the position of the Chief Justice, but it was eventually decided, after the most careful consideration, that in view of the strong feeling of the New Zealand Ministry on the subject, and having regard to the fact that the matter was one of essentially local concern and that no Imperial interests were involved, there was no sufficient reason for advising His Majesty to refuse his assent to the proposal.