The Charleston daily news. [volume] (Charleston, S.C.) 1865-1873, 1868-10-24
Protestant Episcopal General Triennfai
Convention.

-Tha Convention reassembled in New York al
the usual hour Tuesday morning.
The minutes having been read and spprove9'
+he Committee on Canons reported an amenu,
ment to canon 5, requiring the exammatlon o.
candidates for admission to the orders 70 eA'
tend over parts of three days, sao eAamlna- q!
absence by Standing Committee, consisting
of one Presbyter appointed by the bisnop ano
one by the diocese.
After debate and one or two verbal amend
mepts. the amendment was adopted.
The order Of the day, the vote upon the neA'
place OF meeting OF the General Convention
was then called up, and after balioung, 6aitl'
delphia 4. The adoption OF Baltimore was
made unanimous. Recess. -.
Upon reassenbling, DR.. Haight. from the
Committee on Canons, reported adversary "
a change Of canon Is, section 13, title l, ID re,
card to prayers for extraordinary occasions se'
forth BY the Bishops, leaving it optional WI WIFE
the clergy to use such prayers or not as tney
njease. They also reporte i unfayorably upon
= similar change in canon 20, to make it con-
DIR. Stubbs, the original mover Of these
amendments, protested vehementy against
this course. Pending debate, four messages
were received from the House OF Bishops, nom,
Dennties. the Rev. B. W. Morris, of German.
town. Pa, for election as Missionary Bishop o
. Dragon and Washington Territory. 1t was
made the order for noon to-day. The other
messages were referred to the Commlttee on
Canons. ,.:,,
the table.
The Committee ON Canons next reported on
canon 12, title 1, section 6, on the regulation OF
ministers and their duties. The committee re-
ceiyed numerous and nuDierously signed me.
morals asking for the repeal or modihcauon OF
this canon. This is the canon and secuon un,
der which the Rev. MIR. lying was trled lasI
spring. It is as follows:
"No minister belonging to this church shall
oficiate, either by preaching, reading prayers
or otherwise. in the parish or within the pa
rochial cure of another clergyman, unless he
have received express PERMISSION 1or tnat Pur-
pose from the minister OF the Parlsn OF cure.
or. in his absence, t1om the church wardens
and yestrymen or trustees OF the congregations
or majority Of them"
DIR. Goodwin explained the necessity that ex-
listed for some change in this canon. lt Is now
yery vague in its language and It's lnterpretar
ton, and he, therefore, moved the following
amendment:
ResoIued, That clause 1, section 6. OF canon
"a. title 1, is hereby amended 30 as to read
stNo minister belonging to this Church shall
oficiate publicly BY preaching, reading pray
ers. or otherwise, in the parish or within the
parochial cure cf another clergyman, with the
Intention Of establishing, without caronlcai
authority, new parish or congregation there,
in, o.: OF otherwise disturbing the canohlcaI ca
parochial relations Of said clergyman, and
against the prohibition so to ofhciate from the
minister Of the parish or cure, or in his ab-
sepce from the church vardens and Vestry-
men, or trustees Of the congregation, or ma
jority Of them"
: Resoloed, further, That at the end Of para
graph 4. clause 3, section 6, title 1, canon IL,
instead ct the words, sand the assent OF
majority OF such ministers shall be necessary, !"
shall be inserted the following: "and the pro.
hibition aforesaid must be from @ majority OF
such ministers"
DR.. Norton, of Virginia, also offered the fol-
lowing, and ssked DR.. Goodwin to accept 1t In
his own amendment
Resolued. That the report OF the Committee
on Oanons be recommitted, with instructions
to report the following amendments
Resolued, That canon IL, title l, section =,
clanse i. be amended by adding, Nothing in
this canon shall be understood to forbid a MN
lister Of this Church from discharglng all nus
duties as such IN respect OF members OF ms
limits of another minister, except the duties OF
preaching and reading prayers IN puolc con
rreeation," or some other amendment OF the
canon OF like import.
DR.. Goodwin declined, at first, on the ground
that the committee had had the matter before
it long enough, and he favored vote directly
upon it by the Convention. He subsequently
accepted it, however.
DR.. Adams, of WISCONSIN, said that the whole
method of this proceeding was indecorous,
and was intended 10 stultify the action OF the
church in recent trial. He looked upon that
trial and sentence as Judicial Interpretation
of the canon. and this house had no right to
repeal that decision which it is virtually asked
to do. He therefore moved to lay 1t on the
table. %, osed, and withdrawn. The house
expressed its disapprobation of this application
of the gag law.
The Rev. DR.. Rylance, of Illinois, dissented
from the sentlm ents Of the previous speaker:
he considered that the memorials presented
for the modification Of this canon were very
modest and Ch1istiarlike in their character.
They did not ask This house TO reverse the de-
cision in the case referred to, but, acknowledg g.
ing the Justice Of the Interpretation in that
case, they ask for the modification OF
the canon on the ground Of justice and
necessity. While protecting the clergy from
intrusion, they should not place arbltr3-
~ power IN the hands Of any foolish
brother. he had no personal reference to any
brother, and expressed no opinion on either
side of the question as involved in the recent
trial, It was unfortunate that the canon
should have come before them with these accl-
dents. Had 1t not been go nampereu, ne pe-
iisyed that the Convention would have had no
difficulty in modifying or amending it. Minis
ters are constantly violating this canon: He
had nothing to offer himself, but he hoped that
the good sense of the House would adopt
some such change as desired, and which he
believed the arge-heartedness Of the church
allows. He looked upon them all as brothers
and gentlemen, and educated gentlemen, and
he did not think that any brother need be
afraid OF another. He hoped they would re-
lax the rigor Of this canon, and allow the larg-
est liberty for brethren to minister to their
people openly, and not skulkingly, as they do
now. He allowed it to his brethren in Chica-
90, and they to him, without any unfayorable
results. :.
Tho Rev. Mr.. Gadsden, Of South Carolina,
one of the signers Of the memorial, believed
that the canon is ambiguous. He related an
incident which occurred years ago in London,
in which he himself was invited to preach to
pon-Episcopal Church whose minister had dis.
appointed them. He cheerfully accepted, and
aid not consider that he had violated the
canon. which of course would not apply to non
Episcopal Church ministrations, but only to
ministers aud members Of this church.
A motion to lay on the table was offered, to
which DIR. Mason dissented; but it was adopted.
IL WAS. however almost Immediately rescinded,
and the word t'instructions" was stricken out
OF DIR. Nortons amendment, and 1t was then re-
ferred TO the Committee on Cauons.
After the transaction Of soRe further busl-
ness OF little Importance, the secretary read tho
usual notices prior to adjournment. Among
these was one to the effect that memorial was