The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1847-10-27

definite suspension.
Rev DR. HENRY MASON said that he had always enter
ained the opinion that the bishops had right to inct
in the church of God such punishment as they might
see fit. The Epscopate not rs had sometimes been
supposed thing belonging to any individual He be-
leved the authors the canon law who had been
quoted BY the gentlemen would BE- found on careful In
passing such sentence AS they might see 1T He con-
Guided them that the House Of Bishops had divine
right examine any portion OF the copsrcenary Of the
Episcopate, and to inhot such penalty rs they might
fit
mr. WILLIAMS wished to make suggestion to the
house before they proceeded to vote. He wished tn,
bishops have the power say that the suspension
should be perpetual In order that the presoyers might
be tied him. The presbyter when he was ordan-
ed just much by divine right AS the bishop He
did not want take away that power TO suspend 30
that parish could suspend pr-sbyter-whether a
bishop should be liaols to SUSPENSION or not
Mr. GALLAGHER suggested that the gentleman might
gain his objects by adopting the hrst amendment OF the
House OF Bishops.
Rev DR. VAN INcEN was quite astonished at the ar
gument which had been offered Here gentlemen were
proposing to make distinction between perpetual
pension and degradation and depotiontne former b.
ing ccnsidered Intern diAte pun'shme between n
definite suspension anu deposition Perpetual suspension
ne contonded, WAS the MIST Aggravated punishment
which they could pronounce
Judge JONES the oi.hop had beef guilty Of
offences great had been let MIN Dc de-
posed no Keep hun in per petuai suspension
Mr. GALLAoHhR would POM out n distinction between
the vote which pissed this morning and the pre-
proposition Inc former Vas Al sfpost Jacfo law
che other not He did not understand that sem
tsnce of perpetual Suspension irrevocabe.
Dr. VAN iNGEN conceived That IL was rTeVocApl-i
MIR GALLAGHER thought the House of Bishops would
not so decide.
Mr. EVANS thought the gentleman inerror. He sup
posed be the settled poncy OF the church that de-
position was be revokedthst the subject should
become a layman-dig, plough, study medicine prac-
Lice his Mr. Esl profession II he saw ht or any hnB
else. Tine position Of tne gentleman WAS that they
were have two kinds Of Suspension revocAp,v anu IT.
r,vocab,e; it wanted no such Distinction When .ne
bisho became so guilty as perpetuslly suspended
let MN be deposed. ,,,,,u 49, ,A.
Mr. GALLAGHER argued in favor Of his postionon the
grognd mercy. -...u ~,ov,
Mr. WHARroN conceived the difficulty had ;
the discussion about jurisdiction In connecton WIN
suspension. ..u, u rsrnat.
REV DR. WHEAT conceived that If the term perpss-
us suspension, was to be retained, must DO ,S
to accompany It with glossary to refer TO- S and
not see any difference between perpetual suspes ria
deposition He hoped therefore, that the
not concur VITA the amendment OF the mouse y, Dp
The question of non concurrence WIN '"o "''"N
ment WAS then put and carried =. Ar ,vora. e nr,sst
and deacon, . which not agreed 20. III Ar ma,a
The question recurring on concurrihg wiz" '"e "
ment of the house OF bishops, -. h,.. .hst Tho
Rev Mr. YouNa, of s. Co. expressed the nope tno. sne
house would not pass upon It un they had more time
TO reject upon H.