COMMITTEE. (Hansard, 12 June 1868)

§ THE DUKE OF MARLBOROUGH
said, that looking at what occurred on Thursday evening, and also at the Amendments to be moved in Committee of which Notice had been given by the right rev. Prelate who presided over the see of Gloucester and Bristol, the Government had considered the question with the view of seeing how far they were able to meet 1466 the wishes expressed on Thursday evening, and embodied in the Amendments. Questions were then raised as to two points—first, as to the term "Royal peculiars" and the arrangement by which it was proposed to exempt army chaplains, and the chapels in which they officiated, from the interference of the parochial incumbents; and, second, the question whether army chaplains should be subjected to the superintendence of the Bishop of the diocese in which the encampment was placed, or whether they should be subjected, as the Government proposed, to a Bishop or Archbishop appointed by the Government. With regard to the first point, objection had been taken to the creation of additional Royal peculiars, and considering that they had been for some time abolished, and that while they were in existence they had created a good deal of confusion, it was considered desirable not to revive them, and the Government, therefore, adopted the proposal of the right rev. Prelate (the Bishop of Gloucester and Bristol) to substitute the term "extra-parochial district." The effect of this substitution throughout the Bill would be to place army chaplains serving in these extra-parochial districts under the Bishop of the diocese in which they are situate; but the Government could not assent to this arrangement. The position of an army chaplain was very different from that of a curate of the Church of England. The army chaplain had to minister to the soldiers in his charge, and he had also to act in subordination to the commanding officer, who also was bound to submit to his superiors. The army chaplain was also liable to be removed frequently from place to place, and from the jurisdiction of one commanding officer to that of another; and this involved his removal from one diocese to another; and it would be inconvenient with regard to many points of administrative detail if the accident of his being placed in any particular district necessarily and ipso facto subjected him to the episcopal superintendence of the Bishop presiding over that diocese. It was to be remembered that army chaplains had never been subject to any episcopal superintendence, and it was perhaps most desirable that they should be brought under such control, due regard being had to the proper exercise of their spiritual functions; but at the same time it would be a novel expedient if persons be peculiarly and abnormally situated as 1467 army chaplains were to be subjected necessarily to the Bishop of the diocese in which their duties placed them. On the other hand, in cases where a number of army chaplains were congregated together in a camp it might be desirable that the Bishop of the diocese should not be necessarily deprived of the superintendence over them. He might exercise his jurisdiction with great benefit in such cases. But then some latitude should be allowed to the Crown, which ought to have a discretionary power to appoint, under exceptional circumstances, another Bishop to superintend these extra-parochial places. As, therefore, it was not expedient, necessarily, to put these places under the jurisdiction of the Bishops of the dioceses in which they were situate, and as on the other hand it might be desirable to do so in certain cases, the Government proposed so to modify the Bill as to enable Her Majesty in Council from time to time to appoint an Archbishop or a Bishop of the Established Church to exercise episcopal jurisdiction over these extra - parochial places. He had not had time to embody in formal Amendments these views, which he believed were approved by the right rev. Prelates, and therefore he proposed that they should let the Bill pass through Committee pro formâ, after which it could be re-printed and re-committed on a subsequent day.

EARL DE GREY AND RIPON
said, he had no objection to offer to the change of the phrase "Royal peculiar" into "extra-parochial place," if Her Majesty's Government were of opinion that the alteration would not be productive of inconvenience. He thought, however, it would be inexpedient to place these extra-parochial places generally under the control of the Bishops in whose dioceses they were respectively situated; and if this were done under peculiar circumstances, he thought the Crown ought to reserve to itself full power of revoking any Order in Council that might be made on the subject.

THE BISHOP OF OXFORD
said, the Amendments proposed by the Government removed the objection which he had raised last night. In some cases the Bishop of the diocese might not be—in consequence of extreme age, for example—a fit and proper person to exercise superintendence over these places; and, therefore, there could be no objection to the Crown giving the jurisdiction to another Bishop under such exceptional circumstances.