Page:The Annual Register 1899.djvu/178

 170] ENGLISH HISTORY. [aco.

Parliament was prorogued a few days earlier (Aug. 9) than usual, and with greater forethought and economy of time might have ended its labours earlier. The record was neither a long nor an important one, the London Government Act being its only measure of importance, and its Budget of 110,000,000/. its chief distinction. The Queen's Speech, however, usually a colourless leave-taking, was this year marked by an ominous departure from the common form. After referring to the petition of the Outlanders in the Transvaal it proceeded : " The position of my subjects in the South African Republic is inconsistent with the promises of equal treatment on which my grant of internal independence to that republic was founded, and the unrest caused thereby is a constant source of danger to the peace and prosperity of my dominions in South Africa. Negotiations on this subject with the Government of the South African Republic have been entered into and are still proceeding.' '

Outside Parliament the most important events were those more or less directly connected with ecclesiastical matters. The Convocations of Canterbury and York which, without special leave of the Crown, were not authorised to meet together as a convocation, avoided the difficulty by meeting as individual members of different bodies. The subject discussed by this assembly was the Ecclesiastical Procedure Bill, by means of which it was proposed to modify the existing relations of Church and State, and to constitute a Final Court of Appeal in eccle- siastical suits, which should commend itself to the allegiance of the whole body of the clergy. A complaint against a clergyman for an offence against ecclesiastical law in any matter of doctrine or ritual was to be heard in the first instance by the bishop of the diocese, from whom the case might be remitted to the Diocesan Court. From its decision an appeal would lie to the Provincial Court presided over by the archbishop, and the final appeal to the Crown, whilst being nominally, as before, to the Privy Council, was in reality to be to a selected body of arch- bishops and bishops of the two provinces, who should through the existing machinery of the Privy Council convey to the Church the decisions of the episcopate. The question whether the existing judicial committee of the Privy Council was to be left free to adopt or reject the episcopal opinion was the subject of much controversy, but as no steps were taken to bring the bill before Parliament the need for its final solution did not arise.

As soon, however, as the two Houses of Convocation came to discuss the details of the bill before them, a very im- portant divergence of view became manifest. The Upper House proposed that when the appeal against the decision of the Provincial Court was successful that decision was to be remitted to the Provincial Court, "to the end that right and justice may be done in accordance with the order of the Crown." On the other hand, the Lower House proposed that where the appeal was successful "the case shall be reheard in the

VjOOQ IC