The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1847-10-19

specific requiston and by most singular axity the Ian
guage Of this In regard TO the mode OF election
far loose than the for the election ofs doce
san bishop It merely says, an :, assistant bishop
Now he bound to say, that II the bishop had not
only nominated but had actually moved the election
aud procured from the convention the certificate the
house is bound it, unless IL knows good
reason to the contrary Is not permitted to behind
language Of ths canon was more precise he would insist
still that the house bound to assent to the
tion for he holds that diocese has natural right the
services of bishop, that when it's bishop il disabled
and natural right to the aid Of another bishop
tingency shall have occurred He holds that 1t is
petent for this house to inquire into the domestic affairs
Of diocese aud when the house does So we shall have
established inqustion of the worst kind The house
must he commended give Its consent to these testimon
ais unless 1t knows them to be false. The act
called upon to perform b a. the gentleman says solemn
one but the responsibility in the has been dis
charged by the docesews have only say that
our hands In regard to the certificate presented to
the question Is have before the evidence required
the nature Of the certificate he submitted the house
can't require any alteration in the details The canon
does not rere It, The to elect of belongs
to the diocese and cannot institute a medical com.
mission to inquire into the health Of the bishop The
the assertion of the bishop unless the diocese
pened OF Its act the house would be obliged to assent
their bishops election and he believed the diocese has
given some evidence that the bishop unable by
been given the house bound to assent to it, and ON this
account he thought great deal Of the debate the
| 80
much time in debating rumors. 1t will not have time
to attend to the important business that waiting
its action. He maintained that, notwithstanding the
objection the house is bound to follow the canon and
give its assent to the ordinary certificate presented
Several other gentlemen spoke this subject but
are compelled to omit making report Of them, in
| quence OF want Of space.
Mr. GEORGE NJ. WHARTON, Of Pennsylvania, said that
the question before the convention the motion of
as S ~ an IRON Morse 10 rssr the pa
such reference for reasons which he would brief
s.1s s ne conceived that tne diocese OF Illinois nsd
very htte TO 90 with the subject matter before the
house 1t was question for this house to settle, and
% was ~ Uppossa 70 M ne woua say 'at
snbact Q, acGn ~ nat mouse upon tne
suuec. appeaIsd 10 MIN that there were TWO ques
t Inv hnvo'veu IN sne caseLthe one question OF Jaw
question Oh iacs me question Oh law had
5000, e W sio ProPer cpnstr oi Tue csnons WIN
70 an assistant BISHOP In MS humble opinion
hsrs naa oeen some with reference TO
that .o ~ M "O @ n S. he On .ne supJso.,
dsab;tv vas a s"' M q, e oS that th
wa; mistake There wa. no canon Of the church
nt LILLY ny oorsaoa'e " oH,s'InE uio aSo y. rer
the fact existed that bishop wa. too aged
nermansnt csnss ~ isrst ;;d;,n V tthad =,
he docsss and b"v had & ~ S
ton All That ths .auor sss;S ,,ith reoarI 20 ~ s'S
;act vss th.t n ~ St ~ A. h;i;. al Vh o ' ~
diocess had rabt 70 sct =. ;t and so tH srv
na;n rsssor thas 20 ~ h @ T ti e MY
H. aiocsss x.s dsnrvod ~ nr;xa 80 hb a. @
Justly Snt;tlad Now Inv said th ss M mod nn;ntsI
mt ,h wv Nv ne saa mere was no hoae p1n.so
con,d ba s.t;sasd ~ th ,t.yo, IN 80 iS ~
diocese was satisfied with tbs sviJsnce of anv msmhsr
NJ tLa oonwsrton ~ 20. ana,nn 10 49, 49, y.r.oai
that the bishon vas TOO arsd thew had riybt IN nro
cesd to the ssction ~ hshon Than II tha
diocese WAS satisfied with this fact and H they had pro.
ceeded upon the OF that fact TO the
of an asstant thew had done all that was TO
be done BY the canons OF the church 1t mattered not
whether the bishop to be was primary or an as
sistant bishop The same testimonials must be pro.
ducsd In the in the other. He apprehendsd
that true of the canon was that the
diocese been mistaken with regard to the fact that
would not have given jurisdiction to the house In
other words he believed that the diocese must have
elected bishop In thu sup uoston that the bishop was
disabled unless the fact was So the diocese would
authorised to proceed He that the
diocese had its duty and now the house az
called upon to discharge their duty He submitted
then that this house be satisfied in the same
| manner the diocese of Illinois had been satisfied
| Was there then any mode of obtaining further evil
deuce? He submitted that there was none The canon