Alexandria gazette. [volume] (Alexandria, D.C.) 1834-1974, 1871-06-15

and supervision Of business. :,
The question being taken on the proposed
amendment it was lost.
Judge Lowe asked why the societies of Rich
mond were not represented in the convention.
The chair said that all the societies in the
State were represented but those of Martins
burg. Lynchburg and Richmond. He did not
know why Martinsburg was not represented,
but supposed there was some good reason. In
Petersburg there was society, but its objects
were only educational In Lynchburg society
existed. but he did not know whether repre-
sentatives from it would be admitted here, as
it was not strictly on Catholic basis As to
Richmond, where there was Il society number
ing over two hundred, he was afraid there was
opposition to this Union and spirit of hostili
t. because as the capital they thought the con
yention ought to have been held there. The
letters lie had received from there were not
complimentary, and he had even heard that an
attempt had been made to get up there another
Union, which, however. could not be done. in
this attempt the committee of those opposed
to the present Union had been instructed not
to correspond with Alexandria, Norfolk Ports
mouth. Martinsburg or Fredericksburg
Mr. McDonough did net think there VA: any
organization in Richmond.
Mr. Moore introduced a resolution that this
Convention memorabilia the Bishop of this
Diocese Of its proceedings. and that commit
tee be appointed to notify him Of such action as
it may take.
Mr.. Moore argued that rs the Bishop was
the recognized head Of the faith, and to him.
next to Pious IN, Wis due all reverence, his
sanction should be had to the acts Of this Con
yention. The Union should do nothing that
did not meet his approval, and his appreciation
on all acts should be had. 1t WAS their. duty as
Catholics If these acts were conl emnel he
should accept the condemnation. The Church
had a right to scrutinizc their proceedings, and
every Catholic WAS bound tn yield, therefore.
why withhold from the Bishop the doings of
the Union It'aIier comforting with him. an
appeal can be taken, but act without his ap-
proval and condemnation will follow.
Judge Lowe opposed the resolution: he yield
ed TO no man in devotion tothc CATHOLIC Church,
but did not consider this 4 test question. He
explained the objects Of the Society and the
differed from Masonry, Odd Fellowship, and
othcrsccrct organizations, to which the Church
was antaeonistic: said that this society was up
held by the Priest. one Of whom Rev. Mr.
McDonou@h ha,l opened lis session with al in
vocation Of God blessing on lis proceedings,
ana mat he h''d 'l". "iI's 'uE appr'Nc' " ND
nv Il ~ y s''u "1 ua;,,,,,, 4
'sn r,'.' ST. i'' .'. nnn;ii;ns - icnn,,i;<, tL
,i i'''' ~ I'r;a'.,ILa i!rrnn
;:''' 81, ~, .''.'' - tIn ;j,pnnont
ms ic'IG% - Di S.'o'ii't'lns - .mr i lux
u 'llS I'ISI'"F J.. "'' ''',IT ''i; ,ho
'"'l',' !''' "'''''' ''' '''''
''SWt''io H.. ..;,, ,,,l H., u
C,tLnI;,. N,,ji ynrr AGAINST hi, resolution. II
he thought the Bishop lid nj approve Of the
society he would resign,
'''tI' i'oMc ueHH,luu ~ 'lI ">,v ''''' -,
L' lCH'i '''a I;J W. K;Irnnr ,nJ :, ~nnj
'lnnl ~ n,,nim,;nr rn:n,i WT War;. Akin"
"o"' ,,,;,i r.,n ,r,n, H.. rnrv,n,inn
Put W. K;l,,nu. ,m,,r,!rJ +, him Lri;rr he
r ,,, '' f. William his resolution
Wr EiInour saiI that the Catholic religion
v,s III. Lw ,lontion. he held fine Pore and
BisLnr in - hi@h reverence rs any one and
would not have his devotion TO hi, faith ques-
toned: he was sorry that this tirc-brand had
been thrown into the Convention which had
met for the augmentation Of Lrotherly love: he
did not disguise his opposition to the rc>olu-
| ton, and felt Keen y the assertions made by
Mr. Moore.
1T this point there were several calls 10 or,
der motions to adjourn made and points OF
order raised during which, and while half Il
dozen members were trying to ret the floor at
one time,
On motion Of Mr.. llcwcS the Convention ad-
jOurnCd till Friday in"rnng at . clock. an
voted jnwnLtrr 10 six