Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1859-10-07

ton the gentleman had given from the Ton
stitution of the United States. Tho Church
ana State are not united in this respect, ana
no analogy even can be drawn in this matter
/ We stand under the pgis Of our constitution
and this provision is mandatory in its charac-
ter. The Bishops are required to give ineil
reasons for u0u.concurrencc within three
! DAYS, or their noa.concurrencc cannot pre-
vent the Canon becoming law
lie had TO objection to the matter being refer,
red 20 the Committee on Canons. lie had
presented it al tins time, because the question Oh
the amendment of this article OF the Cohstitu'
ton had Locn made the order Of the day for to-
rorrow, and he wished this question to be set
tied before tina, article should be amended
In regard TO Tie House having all the
facts before them. there were but three
facts which couli have n bearing upon
the subject. First. this House did pass reso-
luton repeating Canons and II OF 1875 Sc
cond. the House of Bishops did not concur in
that resolution but failed TO give Their reasons
for ACKNOWLEDGEMENT, third, TINS ar'c!e Oh
the Constitution provides, that unless they CIV"
their reasons within three days the canon shai!
become law. IIebelicved it perfectly compc'
tent for the House TO pass this resolution now.
bu, he had no objection to the motion 10 re:er
the matter to the Committee or CanonS, and
would accept it as part Of his resolution.
Mr.. Convncham. OF Pa, agree! c:irct!T that
il was the duty of the House of Bishops to have
.-iyrn at crgth their reasons for non-concur-
renee; but having failed to give such reasons.
and the House of Clerical and Lay Deputies
having accepted their message OF nonconcur'
cncr as their action upon the SUBJECT without
.,Lin, execution to il: was il not our duty TO
overlook their failure TO comply with TINS ell
gagemcnt:
Rev DIR. Hawks. OF " Y, admitted that by
insisting on the technical construction oil the
ruIe the action of this House in this case might
be held to have the force Of law. but there was
much force in the remarks OF the gentleman
from Pa: ard he hoped the matter would be
permitted to 90 To the Committee Oh Sanons'
They could report tomorrow, and then the
subject could be satisfactorily adjusted.
Rev Mr.. Crane. Of Miss. thought that N
courtesy TO our RI Rev. Fathers, the Bishops,
a Committee of Conference with them shou!
be appointed to consider this matter
Mr. Chambers Of Md, wished to enter his
dissent to the position now advanced. II was
no; a matter of courtesy. Ii was u matter OF
compliance with the Constitution. II the House
Of Bishops have not complied with tins require
mcnt Of the Constitution then. by virtue o! that
NONCOMPLIANCE, the action OF this House be-
came the law OF the Church. There i no prov-
sion in our Constitution which can make law
| bv courtesy. The mode of enactment Is Spcc!-
iically prescribed in the Constitution, and II tins
resolution was passed III accordance with that
requirement, it Is conStitulonaIy binding upon
the Church. He had no doubt that when the
attention Of the Bishops was drawn TO it, they
would comply with The Constitution.
! Mr.. Williams thought IT vas cOu::cSy due
to th,. Bishops that this House should not on
is own responsibility undertake TO determine
on the constitution by striking these CanonS
from the statute book. suppose we should strike
them off and the House Of Bishops should
con,,ruc the constitution differently and retain
them. the judicial tribunals would then if
called on nave 10 determine which House had
placed 4 correct construction on the conSlltu.
! ton. There was 4 distinction between require
mcnts which were mandatory and those when
were dictatOrv which every legal gentleman
understood He ooncurred heartily with the
gentleman from New York that these CanonS
ought 10 be repealed. but he was not disposed
! to accomplish that object by any indirect mode.
Rev. DR.. Ninton repeated the circumstances
/ connected with the action OF the two Houses
Z
! the las, Convention: ard also gave the history
Of the adoption o! the article Ui the Cons;itu
ton nv which the House Of Bishops was per
mi;lcd to exercise vote upon the action Of the
I House Of Clerical and Lay Deputies Up to
I lsoS the House of Bishop, had no veto at all
( upon the action Of the other House; and when
! this article of the Constitution vas then adopt
I ed, giving them that vr:o power. Iii. :c>tric-
! ton was insisted Oh.
Ir. McCrahy, Of South Carolina, rose to test
the temper Of the House. and not TO detan
| them if they wished Immediate action. 1t did
no, seem to him that would be the action Of a
delibcratiyc assembly. For himself he should
rather spend his days and his nights in pur
suing il than to take the question on it before
he was prepared. He would not object to
sending il to the Committee. He thought the
! House y: bishops, which sits with closed
doors, ought 1t least 10 give their reasons
! for their action; it WAS the only check we
| have upon their action. lie differed very much
! from rs friends who thought this requirement
! Of the Constitution wa, directory and not man
/ tlatory. Was it not in the Constitution, and
was it not there is a SuhStantiy" requirement:
/ II WAS a requirement which We had 40 right TO
overlook. ihc argument that they had not
! time TO send their reasons would be powerful
one ii they had not sent message; but
having acted upon it and sent 4 message Of
non.concnrrcncc they could have sent their
reasons.
Mr. Conrad thought that the Committee
would not have time To consider the subject if
they were required to report before reaching
the order OF the day tomorrow.
Rev DR. Mead said Il they were not ready
to report they would have TO postpone the
order Of the day.
Mr. A>ton Of :. c.. moved to strike out
that part OF the resolution which required the
Committee 10 report tomorrow. 1t did not
appear on our journals like the proceedings Of
j deibrrativc body, to require committee TO
report upon 50 important n subject in that
time The order Of the day for tomorrow
could be postponed for the purpose of giving
the Committee time TO deliberate.
The motion to amend was subsequently with !
drawn, ana the resolution as offered referring |
the matter 10 the committee on CanOns, with |
instructions 10 report Tomorrow, was adopted. |
After the transaction OF some other business, ,
full report of which will appear in to.mor /
rows paper, the Convention, at half past three .
o'clock, adjourned.