« PreviousContinue »
relief of the Diocese of New York, its Bishop being | ble services during past years in the varied posithen under suspension without any precise limit tions he has filled as a member of this body, we deof time ; and, under the provision of this section, sire to make most grateful acknowledgments; and two Bishops were elected, Bishop Wainwright we also now tender him our deep sympathy in the and the present honored Diocesan, Bishop Potter. Providential dispensation which deprives us of his The sentence was passed on Bishop Onderdonk in efficient aid and counsel, while we assure him of 1844. The following General Convention of 1847 our prayers for his speedy recovery. passed the following Canon, Canon 10 of Title II.: Resolved, That the Secretary furnish Rev. Dr.
“Whenever the penalty of suspension shall be Haight with a copy of these resolutions." inflicted on a Bishop, Priest, or Deacon in this Rev. Dr. VAN DEUSEN, of Central New York. Church, the sentence shall specify on what terms or I desire to add nothing to the resolutions. The simat what time the said penalty shall cease.
ple statement that I express in these resolutions is, I The Convention of 1847 designed to prevent any am sure, the feeling of every member of this House. such indefinite suspension again. Therefore, there I would not ordinarily offer such resolutions, berever can be any further use for this section. There cause I do not think they are generally necessary ; nerer can be another Provisional Bishop elected for but Dr. Haight's services during past years have this reason.
That sentence was considerod anoma- been so long and so valuable, and his self-denial so lous, if not illegal, and, therefore, the General Con- great, that I feel, under the circumstances in which vention in 1847 passed the section declaring that the he is placed, it is due to him from us to make some time when the suspension should cease must be stat- acknowledgment therefor. I therefore ask the ed. With the death of the late Bishop Onderdonk, privilege of presenting these resolutions to this all need for this section passed away. I submit that House. it is unnecessary to continue a Canon in our Digest for which we have no further use. I move the ref
Rev. Dr. MEAD, of Connecticut. I second the erence of this resolution to the Committee on
motion, if it be put, on the resolutions of the Rev. Canons.
erend Deputy from Central New York. I think Dr. The motion was agreed to.
Haight well deserves this compliment. Dr. Haight
entered this Convention in 1865, and was a member DIOCESAN SYNODS.
in 1868 and 1871. He served two sessions upon the
Committee on Canons, and a most valuable member Rev. Dr. KIDNEY, of Minnesota. I wish to of that Committee he has been. His suggestions propose a Canon and move its reference to the
have been very valuable to me, and it is with deep Committee on Canons, and I will occupy less than regret that we miss him from the Committee five minutes in explanation. It is a Canon entitled "A Canon authorizing the Formation of Synods of
at this time. I fully agree in the hope that this Dioceses.” This was the only part of the provi
House in respect for his valuable services during
the long period he has been in this Convention will sional system which I had in my mind when I moved, pass the resolutions offered by the gentleman from the other day, that it be referred to the Committee Central New York. I think Dr. Haight richly on Amendments to the Constitution to take into merits it, though I think such a resolution might consideration the expediency of devising such a have been passed in behalf of Mr. Murray Hoffman system. It was in order to facilitate the union when he left. It is never too late to do right. of Dioceses within one State or Commonwealth in a Rev. Dr. HALL, of Long Island. I move the suscommon Synod. Certainly a difficulty has arisen pension of the rules and the immediate passage of whenever new Dioceses have been created whereby the resolutions. they have lost instead of gained in unity. This has The PRESIDENT. If all objection is withdrawn, been felt to be an evil in this State. The several Dioceses in this State have fallen apart as disin
it is not necessary to suspend the rules.
Rev. Dr. CADÝ, of New York. I did not object. tegrated fragments. They have felt less interested The PRESIDENT. I know, but the gentleman in each other after such division than before.
from Louisiana, I think, did. Those literary institutions in which they felt a Rev. Mr. GIRAULT, of Louisiana. I will not common interest have been, since the division, ob- stand against the will of the House, as a matter of jects of interest to one Diocese solely. It is in order to amend our machinery for preserving The PRESIDENT. The question is on the passuch unity and identity of interests which are com
sage of the resolutions offered by the Reverend mon among them, that I introduce this Canon. I
Deputy from Central New York. had bestowed some thought upon it, when I The resolutions were adopted unanimously. found already the work done very largely to my hand by a late honored member of this House, the DELEGATES FROM MISSIONARY JURISDICTIONS. Honorable Murray Hoffman ; and the Canon which I shall introduce is his Canon, with one provision
Mr. WELSH, of Pennsylvania. Mr. President, superadded. It is entitled "A' Canon authorizing
I have a resolution, which I hand to the Secretary the Formation of Synods of Dioceses."
to read. The proposed Canon was referred to the Commit
The Secretary read as follows : tee on Canons.
“Resolved, That the standing order adopted at the
General Convention of 1871, on the eighteenth day REV. DR. HAIGHT.
thereof, page 198, be amended by striking out the Rev. Dr. VAN DEUSEN, of Central New York.
words “directly and specially affecting their reMr. President: I hold in my hand some resolutions of
spective jurisdictions and no others, upon the motion courtesy simply, which I had prepared early yester
of any member of this House,' and inserting in day morning, and which should have been presented
place thereof the words 'but not to vote,' the then, but I was unable to offer them till the present
standing order as amended to read as follows: time.
“Resolved, That one Clerical and one Lay Deputy, The resolutions were read, as follows:
to be chosen by any Convocation of all the clergy and “Resolved, That this House heard on Saturday representatives of the laity, convened by the auwith great regret the announcement that the Rev. thority of the Bishop of any missionary jurisdiction, Dr. Haight would be unable, on account of indis- within the limits of the United States, shall be enti: position, to perform the duty assigned him as a tled to have seats assigned to them in this House, Deputy from the Diocese of New York.
and may be allowed to speak on any question, but Resolved, That, in view of Dr. Haight's valua- not to vote ; and that this be a standing order of
this House, and printed with its Journal at the end mous, it reached the House of Bishops thereof."
too late for their action. I offer it Mr. WELSH, of Pennsylvania. My motion is in the hope that it
may meet with that this be referred to the Committee on Canons, better fate. I am not going to make any speech and I will state the reason for the amendment. At in regard to the very important subject of discithe last session we authorized each of the Missionary pline. The question presented in my resolution is Jurisdictions to send one Clerical and one Lay Dep- not shall we enact such or such a system of disciuty. In a few cases they have complied with it. pline ; not even shall we enact any further provithink there are three Clerical Deputies present only sions than we have ; but simply to appoint a com-the Rev. Charles R. Bonnell, from Oregon and mittee to enquire whether any such enactment is, in Washington Territory ; the Rev. Dr. Melancthon fact, needed or not, and this surely involves nothing Hoyt, from Dakota Territory, that veteran mission- very revolutionary. ary ; and the Rev. Samuel D. Hinman, the mission- I ask for this enquiry because it seems to me that ary to the Indians, from the Missionary Jurisdiction the words in the Rubric immediately before the ofof Niobrara. There are two Lay Deputies-one fice for the administration of the Holy Communion, from Colorado and the other from the Missionary · open and notorious evil living,” need definition, Jurisdiction of Niobrara.
something supplementary in the way of specificaRev. Dr. PERKINS, of Kentucky. The Rev. Mr. tion; and this, it seems to me, is needed both for peoFinch is here also.
ple and for clergy: As it is, if a clergyman decides Mr. WELSH, of Pennsylvania. His name is not in his own mind that the carrying of a gold-headed on the roll.
notorious evil living,” The SECRETARY. Not on the printed list, be and his Bishop agree with hin the cause he came too late ; but it is on the roll of the layman who
carries such a cane may be House.
suspended from the Holy Communion withMr. WELSH, of Pennsylvania. This merely au- out remedy, certainly without any direct or immethorizes these Deputies to speak, not to vote. It has diate remedy. So again, on the other hand, if a its analogy in the case of Delegates from Territories clergyman attempts to exercise discipline, in cases in the House of Representatives. Those who know where discipline is clearly called for, the chances are these gentlemen, and are aware of their long expe
that he will be considered by some one, and probarience in the Church, may feel sure that they will bly by more than one, as acting on his own private, not be likely to trespass on the time of the House. mistaken, perhaps wilful misconstruction of the They have valuable experience, and if we limit a words of the Church, and not on the Church's unlarge missionary jurisdiction that has a Bishop to questionable authority. one Clerical and one Lay Deputy, we are restricting Surely there ought to be some remedy for this, it very much. Their Bishops have a voice and a remedy, I think, there is. No one ever thinks in the House of Bishops ; but have of taking personal offence at
conducvirtually muzzled them here; but perhaps it was tor of a street car for not turning out and giving proper until we saw who came. Those who know way. He cannot do it. He must keep to the track. these gentlemen, who know the value of their So I think we ought to have a track laid down for the services and the vast experience they have had on clergy in this matter of discipline, from which they subjects that it is very important for us to be in- themselves could neither depart nor could any formed upon, will be disposed to remove the restric- blame them for keeping to it. I will simply say tion. This amendment inerely removes the restric- that no one should for a moment think that such a tion, they having no vote, but the liberty to speak. system of discipline as that to which this resolution My motion is that this change be referred to the looks is anything modern or sectarian. I Committee on Canons.
So. I know that Rev. Dr. BERKLEY, of Missouri. I suggest, as many
to think that a Church, in orthe pressure on the Committee on Canons is very der to
catholic and comprehensive, great, that, if they take up the subjects referred to must tolerate not only a very wide range of error them seriatim, it may be a week before they come in doctrine, but a very wide range of vice in life. to this question ; and if this compliment is to be Surely this was not the conception of the Catholic bestowed on the Clerical and Lay Deputies from Church in those days when the Church was catholic the Territories, it is desirable that they should have indeed, and such, I trust, will not be the conception the opportunity at once of speaking and voting as of the Catholic Church when the ultimate action well in the Convention.
comes to be taken, if so be that ultimate action shall The PRESIDENT. The question is on the motion be taken on this resolution. to refer the resolution to the Committee on Canons. The PRESIDENT. By a vote of two-thirds of The motion was agreed to.
the House the resolution may be at once considered.
The Chair will put the question.
Two-thirds not voting in the affirmative, the reRev. Mr. SHIPMAN, of Kentucky, submitted the solution was not now considered, but was ordered following resolution :
to be placed on the Calendar. “Resolved (the House of Bishops concurring),
REPRESENTATION OF DIOCESES. That a joint committee, to consist on the part of this House of three clergymen and three laymen, be Rev. Dr. BEARDSLEY, of Connecticut, submitappointed to consider and report to the General
ted the following resolution: Convention what action, if any, is desirable in addition to or in explanation of the provisions already
“Resolved, That it be referred to the Committee enacted by this Church for the godly discipline of
on Amendments to the Constitution to consider and its communicant members."
report whether Article 2 of the Constitution ought Rev. Mr. SHIPMAN, of Kentucky. I will simply
not to be so amended as to make the representation say that this resolution is the same substantially as
from the several Dioceses, in the House of Clerthe one which I offered in 1871 in the General Con
ical and Lay Deputies, accord in some degree with vention at Baltimore. At that Convention, howev
the numerical strength of the parishes, clergy, and er, the resolution was suffered, from my own fault,
communicants of each Diocese." I believe, to remain on the Calendar until the very Rev. Dr. BEARDSLEY, of Connecticut. Mr. last day of the session, and then, although it passed President, I do not know that I should have offered the House of Deputies by a vote very nearly unani- this resolution, had not two propositions already
been referred directing the Committee to consider tion be referred to the Committee on Amendments this second article of the Constitution.
to the Constitution. In 1832 a motion of this kind was made, but the Mr. BATTLE, of North Carolina. I move to lay House of Clerical and Lay Deputies for that year the resolution on the table. did not have as careful a Secretary as we have, and
Mr. PEIRCE, of Michigan, I suggest that it is therefore no record of the ultimate disposition of
always usual to let matters be referred when a refthe matter appears.
erence is proposed. I do not suppose that after the acknowledgment of American Independence there could have been Rev. Dr. FULTON, of Alabama. I think the fact any union of the States unless there had been a con- that one gentleman moved to lay the resolution on cession of rights and privileges from the larger ones the table led a number of Deputies, including with to the smaller. So each State was allowed a repre- them myself, not to vote when the Chair put the sentation in the Upper House, or the Senate, of two question. I think the proposed reference, as in commembers, and each State might have mon courtesy, ought to receive the approbation of
in the Lower House, the this House. The Committee can discharge the matpopular branch,
according to ter summarily afterwards. I trust the vote may be the ratio of population. It is our boast that we again taken. have framed our Constitution after that of the civil
Mr. BATTLE, of North Carolina. I think the government. We have
always been called a Repub- motion to lay on the table is a proper motion, and lican Church, and we have, after the example of that it was made in proper time. I do not wish to Congress, an Upper House, wherein each Diocese is
have a debate on this question, and I insist on my perpetually represented by its Bishop, and
a Lower motion. House-this-composed of Clerical and Lay Deputies. The PRESIDENT. The House can indicate its The Constitution allows each Diocese to elect not will in regard, not to the merits of the resolution, more than four clergymen and four laymen. Wheth
but to the question of courtesy, by the vote to lay er it was in the mind of the Convention at the time
on the table. I will put that question. The motion the Constitution was framed, that the new and is that the resolution lie on the table. small Dioceses would send only one or two repre- The motion was not agreed to. sentatives, I know not; but now it is true that all The PRESIDENT. The question recurs on the the new Dioceses send their full delegations, four motion to refer the resolution to the Committee on clergymen and four laymen ; at least, all the seats Amendments to the Constitution. assigned to them are fully occupied ; and we have The motion to refer was agreed to. stretched the Constitution so far as to give Deputies from Territories seats on this floor, without the
EXAMINATIONS FOR DEACON'S ORDERS. right of voting, but before long that thing will be
Rev. Mr. STONE, of Delaware, submitted the asked for.
following resolution : Mr. President, I desire to make a comparison of “Resolved, that the Committee on Canons be dia few statistics, just to show what state we are in
rected to enquire into the expediency of so amendand what state we are likely to come to. Somehow
ing Canon 4, Section 3, 'Of Examination for the or other these new Dioceses have a great deal of
Diaconate only,' in such a manner as to add to the time to go into ancient matters, and they furnish to
requirements of a candidate for the deacon's orders us quite as much business as the old Dioceses. They
Resolved, also, That the same Committee be dip into Nicene matters, ancient councils, and all
directed to enquire whether the requirements that that sort of thing, and they come here and seem to
pertain to the third examination for priest's orders think that the Church is represented in this country may not be substituted for those now required of not by its members, not by its communicants, but by candidates for deacon's orders in Section 3, Canon 4, the number of square miles. We have had from two
so that all candidates for deacon's orders be reor three of these new Dioceses applications to have
quired to pass an examination in the same. missionary jurisdictions set off from them, and
Rev. Mr. STONE, of Delaware. I have simbefore long these missionary jurisdictions will seek
ply to say that those of us who have had anything to be erected into Dioceses, and come here knocking
to do with the education or examination of candiat our doors for admission. Some of them will be
dates for orders are under the impression, I think, seeking for the provincial system. One Bishop that the candidates come into the Church too easily whose Diocese has less than three thousand commu
under the requirements “for deacon's orders only,” nicants has proposed that his Diocese should be
and what is meant by that I do not precisely underdivided into sections and a provincial system
stand. I never knew of but two deacons only," adopted. Now, I wish to give a few statistics, just
and one of them is now a priest. They are to show how great the disparity is in this direc
required to have a knowledge of the Prayer-Book tion
and of the Bible, qualifications which any respectable The PRESIDENT. It will be for the House to Sunday-school teacher possesses. The difficulty is say whether it will hear the gentleman further. that after they get into the ministry it is too late
Rev. Dr. BEARDSLEY, of Connecticut. Have to correct any deficiencies or any lack of education I taken up my full time ?
or of requirement or qualification. Any man, after The PRESIDENT. Yes, sir.
he becomes a deacon, is a minister of the Church to Rev. Dr. BEARDSLEY, of Connecticut.
all intents and purposes. He can take charge of a pardon.
parish, do all its work, and do almost anything exThe PRESIDENT. There is no Calendar now, cept administer communion ; and, if he is lacking and if the House chooses the gentleman can go on. then, you cannot turn him out, you cannot keep him
Rev. Dr. BEARDSLEY, of Connecticut. I will back. Now I propose that the Committee be directed, take a few moments longer if the House will in- instead of requiring candidates for deacon's orders dulge me.
to be examined only in the Bible and Prayer-Book, Rev. Dr. KNICKERBACKER, of Minnesota. I to require them to be examined on the third examimove that the gentleman have leave to go on. nation required of candidates for priest's orders.
The PRESIDENT. It will require a two-thirds There is a very generally foggy atmosphere over vote.
all these Canons in regard to candidates for orders Rev. Dr. BEARDSLEY, of Connecticut. I do and their examinations. Things are very much not ask it, then.
mixed and not clear and distinct, and they need a The PRESIDENT. It is moved that the resolu- 'general overhauling.
I will read what is required of priests in their third the whole paper read. The Chair will put the quesexamination:
tion again on allowing it to be read. “The third examination shall be on Church His
The question was decided in the affirmative. tory, Ecclesiastical Polity, the Book of Common The PRESIDENT. The paper will be read. Prayer, its history and contents, and the Constitu- The Secretary read as follows: tion and Canons of this Church, and those of the Dio- “To the House of Bishops of the Protestant Episcese to which the candidate belongs."
copal Church in General Convention assembled : When the Committee report on the subject I shall * Reverend and beloved Fathers in God : have something further to say. I will not detain “We, the clergy and laity of the House of Clerical the House now.
and Lay Deputies, respectfully beg leave to represent The resolution was referred to the Committee on that we are anxious to come to a clear and definite Canons.
understanding of the Ritual usages of the Church, RITUALISM.
in view of a great and an increasing variety of Rev. Dr. REYNOLDS, of Kansas. I hold in my
practices in the conduct of the services thereof, by hand a copy of a preamble and resolutions passed at
which in some instances our doctrinal soundness the last Diocesan Convention in regard to Ritualism.
and Apostolic character as a branch of the true In order that they may take their proper course to
Catholic Church hæve been called in question. come before this House, I have a resolution to offer. “ In the providence of God, the Bishops of the The resolution was read by the Secretary, as fol
Church have been placed over us as chief pastors, lows:
leaders, and superintendents of the flock, and we “Resolved, That the Committee on Canons be re- gladly recognize their authority, responsibility, and quested to consider the advisability of framing and
loving care of the interests of the whole Church, reporting to this House a Canon or Canons which
as well as the wisdom that has ever characterized shall embody the spirit of the following preamble our Episcopate. With a view, as we hope, of harand resolutions adopted at the last annual Conven- monizing all parties, and to set forward the prospertion of the Diocese of Kansas, which is hereby pre
ity of the Church, and to proinote peace and good sented by the delegation from that Diocese.'
will among us, we believe that it is possible for the The PŘESIDENT. I suppose the Diocesan reso
Bishops to present, during the session of this Conlutions need not be read. The question is on re
vention, a scheme on the subject of Ritual that ferring this resolution to the Committee on Canons. shall prove satisfactory to all parties, and become The motion was agreed to.
of binding force in all our Dioceses. Rev Mr. TRIMBLE, of Arkansas. I send this up
“We conceive that in the House of Bishops such to the Secretary to be read.
a scheme can be originated and carried through with The PRESIDENT. Is it a resolution?
far greater ease and far less intensity of feeling Rev. Mr. TRIMBLE, of Arkansas. A resolution
than in the House of Clerical and Lay Deputies, bewith a preamble.
cause your House is a much smaller body, and your The Secretary read as follows:
sessions are wholly private, and being placed at the "Resolved, That the foregoing memorial be, and
head of the Church, and enjoying the grace of Episis hereby, adopted by this House, and referred to copal consecration, we gladly recognize the fact the House of Bishops.”
that if our chief pastors are brought to unanimous Rev. Mr. TRIMBLE, of Arkansas. Now I ask agreement we shall have no difficulty in placing for the reading of the memorial.
ourselves in harmony with your action. The PRESIDENT. The gentleman asks that the
And, finally, we believe that our chief hope of memorial accompanying this resolution be read.
bringing about a satisfactory solution of the vexed Shall it be read ?
question of ritual lies at the door of the House of The question was decided in the negative.
Bishops. Mr. SMITH, of South Carolina. Is it a memorial
Therefore, Resolved, That the foregoing meto this House !
morial be, and is hereby, adopted by this House, and The PRESIDENT. No, it is a memorial to the
referred to the House of Bishops." House of Bishops.
Mr. SHEFFEY, of Virginia. If that resolution is Mr. SMITH, of South Carolina. How can we
proposed for adoption, I object to its consideration. adopt a memorial to the House of Bishops without
The PRESIDENT. The resolution will be placed considering it ?
on the Calendar. Rev. Mr. TRIMBLE, of Arkansas. I ask for the
COMMITTEE ON CANONS. reading of the paper. Then the gentleman will understand all about it.
Mr. BLAIR, of Maryland. I submit the followMr. MONTGOMERY, of Western New York. I ing resolution : beg to suggest that the rule that memorials and Resolved, That a special committee be appointpetitions shall not be read without an order does ed by the Chair to consider and report whether not apply to this case. It is a part of this resolu- the subjects of legislation vow referred to one comtion that we adopt as the sentiments of this House mittee, to wit, the Committee on Canons, may not what is stated in that memorial to be presented to be classified and several committees constituted, to the House of Bishops. It is the gentleman's right to which they may be appropriately referred.”. have nis resolution-and the memorial is part of it- Mr. President, the House sees that the whole busiread before we act upon it. It is a little ness of legislation and it constitutes a great mass peculiar, to be sure ; but he asks us to adopt of business-has all to be ground out by one Com
address to the House of Bishops in the mittee. No other legislative body in existence so terms there stated. Of course, that is not a contrives its legislation. It seems to me a perfectly memorial within any rule, but it is part of his reso- practicable scheme to classify, as in other legislative lution, and we never can act upon it or refer it bodies, the business, so that we may have a dozen unless it is read. I submit that he is entitled to committees at work, and not pile the whole labor have that read as a part of his resolution. It is not of our short session, because we cannot sit here long, a memorial within the rule, as it is not a memorial upon one Committee. to this House ; but he asks us to adopt the words Mr. McCRADY, of South Carolina.
I suppose that he has put with his resolution as our senti- the resolution goes on the Calendar ? ments, though addressed to the House of Bishops. The PRESIDENT. If objected to it goes on the
The PRESIDENT. It is an anomalous case. I Calendar. hope the House will cut the knot by agreeing to hear Mr. MOCRADY, of South Carolina, If that
resolution is before the House I have something to ! Mr. MONTGOMERY, of Western New York. I say.
believe the rule says that by a vote of two-thirds The PRESIDENT. The resolution is not before we may take up any matter out of its order on the the House. Objection having been made to it, it Calendar. It is not a suspension of the rule. Am goes upon the Calendar,
The PRESIDENT. I suppose so. It certainly MINISTERS ORDAINED ABROAD.
requires a two-thirds vote to take it up now for The Rev. Dr. GARRISON, of New Jersey. I sub
consideration, mit the following resolution :
The motion was agreed to by a two-thirds vote. “Resolved, That Canon 10, Title I., 'Of Ministers
The PRESIDENT. The resolution offered by the ordained in Foreign Countries by Bishops in com
gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Blair) is before the munion with this Church,' line 14, after the words
House. satisfactory evidence,' add the following : From
Mr. CORNWALL, of Kentucky. I move to the Bishop or ecclesiastical authority of the Diocese
amend the resolution by adding : " The classificawith which he is canonically connected, that he is tion shall follow the same order as in the Digesta clergyman in good and regular standing in such
first, a Committee on the Ministry, Doctrine, and Diocese.'"
Worship ; second, a Committee on the Discipline of My reason for offering this is, that it is well known
the Church ; third, a Committee on the Organized to many of the clergy here that clergymen from
Bodies of the Church ; fourth, a Committee on Misforeign parts often come to our shores, and are
cellaneous Canons." allowed to minister without the requisite amount of
These are the divisions of the Digest, and I should enquiry being made as to their character or qualifi
think we might adopt thein without much delay, cations. The Canon, as it now reads, is simply
and greatly facilitate the business of the House. "satisfactory evidence of his pious and moral
Rev. Dr. REYNOLDS, of Kansas. I should like character,” leaving the question open as to how it is to know whether the resolution contemplates disto be ascertainel. I have known one sad case
pensing with the Committee on Canons, or substiwhere a clergyman officiated for some months
tuting other Committees to perform the work which in a parish, who was afterwards found to have been
has been assigned to them. My understanding is at that time a delinquent under the laws of the Pro
that all these matters now go to the Committee on vince of Canada, and was put in prison for his de
Canons. Is that a rule : linquency, there having been no proper enquiry The PRESIDENT. It has been the custom of this into the matter. If we had a definite rule estab- House to refer all such matters to the Committee on lished that he should present letters affirming that Canons. I think that the House has probably burhe is a clergymnan in good and regular standing, dened that Committee too much by referring matthey of course would settle beyond all contro
ters that frequently belong to the Prayer-Book Comversy what he is, and make the whole matter clear.
mittee and to other Committees to the Committee The resolution was referred to the Committee on
on Canons; but I know of no rule of the House by Canons.
which that is necessary. It has only been the cus
tom, TESTIMONIALS OF BISHOPS-ELECT. Rev. Dr. MEAD, of Connecticut. I desire leave
Mr. MONTGOMERY, of Western New York. I
hope the original resolution will pass in the form to submit at this time a report from the Committee
offered by the gentleman from Maryland. The on Canons.
amendment simply is to classify the business conLeave was granted, and the report was read as follows:
fided to the Committee, to be done by this House.
The question to be referred by the resolution is “The Committee on Canons, to whom was refer- whether it is expedient to classify the subjects now red the subject of so amending Sections 2 and 3, of committed to the Committee on Canons, and a speCanon 13, of Title I., as to provide that the testimo- cial committee is to be appointed to report on that nials of Bishopselect shall be sent to the several
subject to this House. If they think that the four Diocesan Standing Committees, and the several
great divisions existing in the Digest are the best diBishops in all cases, instead of as now, to the Gene- visions, they can so report, and the gentleman who ral Convention, when within six months of the meet- offered that amendment can make that suggestion ing of that body, respectfully report that they to the Special Committee. If the Special Cominithave considered the sa ne, and are of the opinion that tee thinks there are better or other divisions, or that it is inexpedient. They therefore recommend the it would be proper only to have these four general adoption of the following resolution :
divisions as heads, and subdivide them, it will so re* Resolved, That the Committee on Canons be port. But it is obvious that when you refer to the discharged from the consideration of the proposed Committee on Canons every subject which requires a amendment to Sections 2 and 3, of Canon 13, of Title Canon or an amendment of a Canon, you refer to one I. of the Digest.”
Committee, as the gentleman from Maryland well Rev. Dr. STEARNS, of Easton. I move that that remarked, the entire legislative business of this report be made the order of the day for Thursday,
House. He contemplates that we shall subat eleven o'clock.
divide that department of
business The motion was not agreed to.
by having all laws
subject The PRESIDENT. The resolution will go on the ferred to one committee, and all laws on another Calendar, of course.
subject referred to another committee; as, for in
stance, that laws affecting Ritual be referred to one COMMITTEE ON CANONS.
committee, laws affecting the testimonials of clergyRev. Mr. BROWN, of Michigan. If the business men to another committee; and all the various on the Calendar is in order, I move that the resolu- headings of our business will then be referred to tion offered by the gentleman from Maryland [Mr. committees on those special subjects, and they Blair) be taken from the Calendar and be the first will report a Canon to carry out any particular business in order,
view of the House. It is obviously impossible for Mr. SHEFFEY, of Virginia. It lies over one one committee to frame Canons to carry out every day under the rule.
possible point of legislation which this House Rev. Mr. BROWN, of Michigan. I move to sus- may wish to enact, and it is, as the gentleman pend the rules, and that the resolution of the gentle- well said, entirely contrary to the practice of other man from Maryland be before the House.
legislative bodies. You might as well, in the Legis