James Bonwick, The Last of the Tasmanians; Or, the Black War of Van
Diemen’s Land, London, pp. 154-155

1

When all were getting ready, the Governor thought it proper that the

blessing of Heaven should be implored upon the expedition.  Prayers were

ordered to be offered up for this object on the Sunday before setting out.

While those employing freedom of language in public ministrations were

left to their own mode of carrying out this obligation, the Episcopalians of

the colony were agitated upon the propriety of the form to be adopted.  As

their spiritual head — their Bishop — resided several thousands of miles off,

at Calcutta, and the Archdeacon in another country, this additional call upon

their devotions was committed to the care of the Chaplain, the Rev. W.

Bedford.  That good man, without doubt, prepared a very suitable form of

supplication, but which, nevertheless, subjected him to public criticism.

While entreating the Divine favour on behalf of an enterprise which

would, if successful, be attended with the blood-shedding of the Natives, an

urgent request was offered for their speedy conversion to Christianity.  This

was held to be slightly inconsistent with the principles of the New

Testament, though admitted to be agreeable to the practice of Christian

governments.  It might not be unlike the conduct of the warlike Bishop of

Norwich, who, after making Wat Tyler’s rebels kneel and confess their sins,

very episcopally gave them absolution, and afterwards very baronially

ordered their throats to be cut.

                                                  

1

  Cited in Anglicanism in Australia. A History (B.N. Kaye ed.; Melbourne: Melbourne University Press,

2002) p. 226 & 340 n. 31.

But pretended exception was taken as to the prayer itself.  It was

called by one paper “a great constitutional error.”  Then there was blame

attached to the chief clerk of the Colonial Secretary’s department for not

transmitting it to the Government printer, or to that functionary for not

publishing it.  It was declared “of importance to know who were the clergy

by whom the English Bench of Bishops were represented.”  The ritualistic

fervour of the writer led him further to say, “However unimportant may be

the mere wording of such a prayer, yet it is of importance that the public

should know by whom it was composed.  There is nothing connected with

the Church, not even [155] the Articles of its Faith, so jealously looked after

as the Liturgy.”  Another political moralist, at the end of this unfortunate

expedition, referred to the blasphemy of this Address to the Deity, and the

hypocritical hope of engaging the services of Heaven in the cause of

injustice and cruelty, and added, “the very arrogance, presumption, and

impiety of this special prayer ensured its defeat.”