The daily dispatch. [volume] (Richmond [Va.]) 1850-1884, 1868-10-30

resolution concerning proposed amend
ment to canon 10, in reference to the time
of residence Of foreign clergymen neces-
sary to fit them to officiate in this Church
as rectors.
The resolution offered non-concurs with
the projected amendment, and was adopted.
The same delegate, for the Committee on
Canons, reported against making it obliga-
tory upon new dioceses to form their stand
ing committees Of equal numbers of lay
men and clergy. The report was adopted.
Another report was made amending ca
non Ia; which was also adopted.
The following gentlemen were nominated
10 NIL vacancies on the Committee to Ex-
anime the proof-sheets Of the Standard
s,ole: The Rev. DR.. George E. Hare and
MIR. James Pott.
The subject of the report of the Commit
tee on Ritualism was then taken up by the
Convention.
The Hon. s. B. Ruggles offered pream-
BILE and resolution; which was ruled out Of
order.
The debate was on the motion of indefi-
mite postponement made yesterday.
The Rev. DR.. Paddock, of Michigan, op-
posed the postponement, as the subject was
of grave Importance, and had not been suf-
iciently discu ssed.
The Rev. DR.. Van Deusen, of Western
New York, sketched the past agitation on
this subject, and claimed the Convention
was incompetent to act in this matter,
which should be left to the judgment of the
several respective dioceses.
The Rev. DR.. Isaac Labagh, of Iowa, op-
DncnI rfad
the duty of this Convention to express it's
decision on this question in unmistakable
terms. e-..
The Hon. S. B. Ruggles supported the
necessity of the House of Delegates making
decision upon the degree of ritual per-
| missible.
DR.. George G. shattuck, of Massachu-
sets, opposed any action upon this vexing
question.
The Rev. c. P. Gadsden, of South Caro-
lina, denounced all innovations as fatal to
| the welfare of the Church.
Mr.. William Walsh, of Pennsylvania,
| thought the subject under discussion was
| unimportant in comparison with other mat
ters, and that its consideration should be
indefinitely postponed.
The Rev. E. Z. Perkins, of Kentucky
(late of Virginia), said it would not be-
come this Convention, representing as it
does the entire Episcopal Church of the
United States, to avoid this question. That
if it did not take action condemning the
increasing ritualistic tendencies Of some
parishes they would feel encouraged by its
neutrality.
After long debate the motion to post
pone was withdrawn, and substitute for
both reports offered by Rev. Mr.. Van Deu-
sen, of Western New York, and laid over.
This substitute was in favor Of giving the
Bishop in each diocese the power of deci-
ding in relation to the rubrical regulation
worship.
During the day the secretary announced
q message from the House of Bishops,
nominating for the Board of Missions the
names of some fifty gentlemen which he
read.
A resolution that the House concur in
these nominations was offered.
A member objected to the name of the
Rev. John P. Hubbard, of Rhode Island,
appearing on the Board of Missions while
he was under trial for violation of canon
in allowing Baptist clergymen to preach in
his church.
The Rev. W. Cooper Mead raised the
same objection, and the House was going
into an excited discussion, when another
member demanded the question, and the
House continued the debate on ritualism, as
above stated