Cleveland daily leader. [volume] ([Cleveland, Ohio]) 1865-1873, 1865-10-07

lost, and the ecommittee discharged from the
consideration of the subject.
Rev. DIR. Cummins then rose and offer
ed the following resolution:
ReSotUed, That this house offers its pro-
found gratitude to God that we have
among US our brethren the clerical and
lay deputies from the diocese of Texas,
North Carolina and Tennessee, and that
we recognize their presence in our midst
as token and pledge of the future and
entire restoration of the union of the
church throughout the length and breadth
of the land.
Judge Spalding, of Ohio, hoped the res
olution would not pass We are glad to
receive our brethren from the seeded
States, but he was opposed to getting
down in humiliation to the mud. We are
| glad to see them, but he considered the
passage Of such resolution as premi-
um for. rebellion. He was entirely op-
posed to it.
Mr.. Farnell, of Pennsylvania, moved to
lay the resolution on the table. Motion
to lay the resolution ON the table was lost,
by yeas A, nays A.
RDr. Hare hoped that the resolution
would pass the house by a large majority.
AAC dDnOlEA olatNGA anu wa Ddlltu Nv lllt
degraded condition in which the colored
race ives kept at the South, but if we work
with the feelings of patriots we ought to
remember how large part of the Episco-
pal Church is implicated at the South. If
we can hold out the olive branch to our
brethren of the South, we ought to do so.
He was surprised at the objection made bv
a ifrefffuer on TINS IfVuse tIit FtsvfJtufr,ir
which he considered entirely inoffensive.
He welcomed our brethren of North Car
olina, Texas and Tennessee with open
arms. He was glad to see them here, and
their presence gladdened his heart
Rev. Mr.. Cummins, had trusted that
when the resolution was offered that it
wonld have passed without debate, in the
spirit which had been expressed by the
last speaker. .s
DIR. Howe also urged the passage of the
resolution.
Tide resolution was then passed.
The question of provincial organization
of the Diocese was then called up
Mr.. Ruggles, of New York, moved to |
refer the question to the Committee on
Conventions, but afterwards considered,
that by referring the matter to special
the brethren of Tennessee
harmony with the delegates of the North
ern States. He gladly withdrew the mo-
ton to refer the question to the Committee
On Conventions.
DIR. Vinton of New York, suggested the
matter be referred to a committee of one
from each Diocese. z....
Rev. DIR. Wharton declined to accept
he amendment as he believed commit
zee of nine would be as fully competent to
lttend to the duties, as a larger one.
Judge Otis said he had moved for a COM
nittee of nineteen with the view of reor-
sanizing the diocese of the whole country.
DR.. Mason, Of Maryland, asked for the
eading of the resolution. which had been !
tfered yesterday. The resolution was ac-
read,
DR.. Mason then concluded his remarks. !
lie said the committee could only con- $
ider the subject and make a report to the t
Convention. No definite action could be !
AIKEN by them and small committee $
Ould act as effectually as large one.
The committee consists of thirteen gem |
leman S
DR.. Wharton also accepted the amend t
lent.
Mr.. VIM. Welch would like to see the S
hurch throughout our whole land work
lg harmoniOusly before any question !
rhieh would commit the Convention to
ny particular course of action was
dOpted.
MIR Maho41, Of Nv > lsnG, moved UnaG
ne report of the Committee be made at
ne next convention, and nOT III Tnls UnU. =