g that none would be conveyed
(1847).

A conference of bishops, held in Sydney (1850), have since this period
proposed a liberal constitution for the Anglican communion, which awaits
the sanction of the law. They demand the complete organisation of the
church and its government by synods, for the arrangement of spiritual
affairs; and by conventions, admitting the laity, for the management of
temporalities. They contemplated the nomination of bishops by provincial
synods; and affirmed that no beneficed clergyman ought to be deposed
except by a sentence following judicial trial. These organic changes
would, probably, greatly promote the usefulness of the episcopal church;
but they seem to contemplate a total severance of its political
dependence. The defect of the ecclesiastical law, which offers serious
impediments to the discipline necessary, cannot but be deemed a
grievance. They have arisen from those connections with the state which
most denominations seem to bear with impatience.

The relations of the churches with each other have occasioned
difficulties rarely of permanent importance. The dispute of the prelates
of the Anglican and catholic communions is an interesting exception. It
led to an adjustment of their relative rank in the colonies at large.
The right of the Roman see to appoint a bishop to act in its name had
been already questioned by the protestant prelate, and met with a
protest from the altar. Such, under similar circumstances, had been the
course of Dr. Broughton. The laws of England retained the abjuration of
a foreign episcopate, and assigned the nomination of English bishops to
the Queen: the catholic vicars-general had in England exercised
episcopal functions; being also consecrated to the oversight of
imaginary sees. This arrangement was needless where the catholic
religion was salaried by the state. The ancient abjuration was retained
among protestants; but its spirit had expired.

The Roman catholic prelate received an address as the "Bishop of Hobart
Town," and in reply recognised the title by adding "Hobartien" to his
name. This document having fallen into the hands of the lord bishop of
Tasmania, he directed a remonstrance to its author, suggesting that to
claim an episcopal jurisdiction over the city was to intrude on a
diocese already appropriated. The correspondence which followed entered
largely into the religious differences of the parties. The papers were
forwarded to the secretar