, 1875-03-07


ct The Protestant Epi1copal Church In the United
Ets1ea touching thi1 1natter3
an unable to See how 2ny person can read Canon
c,u1ions:
FWs-Tha4 there arc two sources Of authority WHOSE
Hssent to the co1secrahon Of Bishopelect
ery to that end l, thu General Convention II it be
In session .tdu1ing the Of the General
Convention" less the si1 months Immediately preced
ns ,s assssF h s15 ns Of 't
Seeond-Thxt Of thest two Of authority, ths
General Convention stands rst In the legal intention
and leisstise systsn OF the Church its action H. &c
10 SPEAK, the legislative action Of tbs Church
and the authority Of the Standing COMMITTEES, In this
sster Vi eorseuting or refusing ~ eonkent to the
conservation Of Diahopelect, oulJ comea into exist
enen ~ e. during Tie recess Of the General Conven-
tpc the Church in Dioceae should b deairous OF
therefore Of The Standing Committees II the premises
il, in fR:t the authority OF the GeesA Convention
m autAorly committed TO them during the rccess OF
The trisnnsal meeting of that body. And the powers
pf the Standing Committees in conacunnK. OF refusng
10 consent 70 ne &c 9 a no, aass M f
he General Convention aase. Which, IN thus matter
Standing Committees that, under the canonh referred
10 .bove they have right 10 enter pon any eonsid
es.tton Of ths personal qaai1esons of Btshopeleet
of the elect, sent TO them from the eecnE po
cefe, regular and that refusing 70 10 informed
they not informed thst he il Justly Liable to eE]l
report either for error tn religion, OF for yciouknsss
of lie md further tat they do not know OF b.
lsve "(meanwle refusing al testimony On the poinsl
~thtse IL any inopedisnent, account Of which he
ought not b. oonsecTated to thAt holy office; but
that he hath they Behave, led his life for thres
basiness in ons word, of ths General Convention,
nf tho Standing Committees, il, eaacsing solemn
tasee simply % tn1ozse the acton\os the eleeting
Diocese, and TO 1atfy nnd confirm it, Choice II On
this ground that the action the ata Gsno conFen-
the OF Dr. Seymour has been 80 bitterly ~
sailed and IT, conVsnton set forth for tho cenasna
t{nnn nf hM Ehrrr
Ihe action Of The General Convention Is denounced
a q illegal and - unprecedented"
IT Is ILLEGAL
Law which, ~ hare said. il certainly new IN tue
Church. None Of cur cenontssa, some 81 tne naca
Of vida reputation such, seem ever to hare he4sa ol
It. Judge Hoffman does not seem 70 b. aware q tnis
Interpretation. Or. Francis vinton Is manafess!y
guoran Of it. Dr. Hawks, Of tbs raost eminent OF
sur w,iters On canon Law, speaking Of tho thinea
which the Doceses "susrendered when they adopt
ID the Constitution Of tn AnaseSn Church, no,xs
erstei Without the consent Of tue Church At large
xhch srs embodied 1be testimonials Of tho Bishop
eleet to signed by tho Lower House Of the General
Ea9rsntion. he retnArks- " 1t u obs1ons tnat mn
ere strict IN sts demands. than any Of it, Frcdeces-
eo7. it, interpretation, however, would sesn to be
free from difficulty" Up to that date OF writing,
tharefore be-.nd 30 the thing must b. supposed
Of me other students Of our Chureh lAw-hAd never
heard Of those wonderful clouds OF dusf about IN
new school Of ecclesiastical for the sake OF
present tssue to blind the eyes Of thosa
sAnaea. cousnenas u,,on tie teatan,enial Lid be-
fore the Hou+e Of Clerical and Lay oepnues' d.
Hawks remarks:
way1 referred With the documents the fact Of cleo
tion, tbs COMMITTEES Consecrat1ons- The object
of de references must e twofold to hr.t that the
cerHncate b n tbs form Of words prescribed; and,
jority Of the Convention making tho cleo
rtY,fJ1 IN
sn' Stal In ' mind .hst th1s ' testinopial has no
references to the fact Of election, or to anything else,
D.ebopeect it proves nothing elae and is not
-one!us!re that point for tbs House SHOULD IL.
any ,ode become satisfied that the individual named
in the testimonial is unworthy, 1t viii not recommend
h1a to :hs Bishops for
Contributions, Constitution and canoHs, D. &c.
Tuthss or havng rRt.1nea II 1h' documents to be
"TitAout these things he <tAc 1'saopclect) cannot
1a15u}I5 be eonsecrae under this eanon; With then.
1evsr has happened in our history 1t probably never
wiu hap7en tl.t que who is known to be unworthy
viii bo ter:nitted to pssa all these ordeas and come
reois;tes for cousecra.ion conlee but should such
the should in any caae subsequent dis
ccveries bring to light disquAdcaons unknown until
every ordeal but the last was passed, the House
of Hi.hopa would rrfute to eonsecrate, and
no fe~er easth could force them to act
their consc3cnces. and flcre it must be 1ft- Each
House in ths General Convention has its rights, and
assent Of the Housc Of Clerical and Lay Deputies,
neither they be forced By the House ia consecrata
any against thcs on assent 1hus careful nas ne
scfatiny.-rst by lhs Convention which elects him,
I'd e shssdly by ~ the % Monss of Bishops bad man
Eay, indeed. get fn Ill these gsArdA
lat .he chocs n IL her has s1 a tsas done
But the action q the late General Convention Was
IT VAS UNPRECEDENTED"
Ii there wore any doubt to the plain meaning of
The words Of the that meaning has been scttled
by the decision Of under 1t. We all know the
reht incorporation Of lswr Now tho HOUSE Of Cier
tc4l and Lzy Deputies has On more than one OCCASION
refused On o. tne psssona ~ 81
ton. The Latest case, believe pr1or TO mai Of Dr
Seymour, the Of TIC Rey- J. B. HEitton, AZ
con&ccraton the General Convention Of 1877 refused
10 give Its consent The House Of Clerical and Lay
DEPUTIES thought thss most excellent ana hghly.
which it deemed 1t important taat Bishop should
POSSESS aud accordingly it refused to ein his tesu
1auais. Rscoud precedent VIC have in the ceebrat-
ed Gaze Of
TIE Rev. DR. HAWKS,
Bifhopclect of the Diocese Of Mississippi In the Gen
erai Convention Of 1s4A There were no technical I'm
l,odiments III tbs way. Certain charges, based upon
events and transactions which had occurred xa2ny
ye4ss before, preferred Against Dr. Haws snd he
tes1ee1 s say VA WI nan Of e eueso md e1pe
sncc: had on the Bench in North Carolina aud
was be6ides oue Of the most learned and able
oa:sts which tho American Church has produced Is
ktrauge that It occurred to him to quAsh
1he whole proceedings. by simply denying the legal
fonpetency of tha General Convention to consider the
lbs tse and refusing to plead to the charges7 He
Clergyman in good standing in the Diocese Of Ais9s
kipri; elected, believe unanimously By the Diocese
nf mississippi to Be its B8hop, which Diocese he also
represented the Convention with no question - 70
the strict legality Of his election a. to the reaEi
ty Of the necessary testimonials: and yet tbs House
rf Clerical aud Lar Deputies proceeds to tr him:
goes Dack OF The action the Diocese Of Mississippi,
aad having gone into thorough discussion Of the
ena1ges against him. and not being fully satisfied Of
his entire fitness for tho Episoonao, virtually refused
to give its assent to his conservation. On the other
hand Dr. hawks unhckitahncly 1dpits The legal right
Of the General Convention to do ali this never, in
deed seen,s have dreamed OF calling in question;
aud when the decision is against him, both be and the
Diocese Of Assaesppi quietly and loyaly accept the
result.
It Is poeabls that under the quibble upon the
word Uniformed " in the testimonials required from
the House Of Clerical and Lay Deputies. may be OBJ
&eced that the General Convention Of 1874 xas i'm
formed IN the matter OF Dr.. uawks. because formal
charges made agaiust him by clergyman Of tie
Diocese uf New York. HID there been no formal
charges made 1t would not have been within the CON-
reeucy of the House to discuss his personal qualities
tona In the presence Of the regular testimonials from
1he Diocese Of Mississippi. But The word Informed"
i'm II In Fbr.1