The evening light. [volume] (San Antonio, Tex.) 1881-1883, 1882-05-19
MISSIONARY DISTRICT OF
WESTERN TEXAS.

WESTERN TEXAS.
Meeting If ,nvoca,ion-Second Days Pro-
ceedings-The Bishops Charge
Amendments.
The convocation re-assembled in St. Marks
church-the Bishop Elliot occupying the
chair. There we're present:
Right Rev. r. w. B. Elliott, D. d.; Rev.
w, T. Allen, Nelson Ayres, c E. Cabanis.
M. E.: Darlington, w. w. Corbyne, N. B.
Fuller, c. M. Nc l.. Howard, w. r. Rich
ardson. T. c. Stanley, F. r. Starr, J. w.
Tays, F. Ticknor, J. B. Trevett.
Lay delegates: General Augar, DR.. E. L.
Beaumont, Major Waelder, Geo. r. Dashiell,
Gen. w. H. Young, General M. P. Small,
David Gregg, Mr. D. Bellinger, DR.. John c.
Jones, Major Sayres, Captain Atkinson, Maj.
w. o. Hutchinson, J. w. Ward, r. D. Love,
E.. D. Martin, A. L. McLane, w. H. Adams,
Charles Brett, it,, Hon. w. Burgess, A. Hen
derson, Henry LeGette, w. A. Meachan, ].
B. Toilette, ]. M. Mccormick, J. Y. Dashiell,
- WalthalI.
The bishop having called for the constitu-
ton and bylaws committee, Major Waelder
reported that they had embodied the three
propositions submitted to them in the report,
and recommended first, that article four, sec
ton 4, that each missionary station within an
organized parish be entitled to lay delegates to
be elected in the same manner as that provid-
ed for other delegates, and (section 81 when
from any cause the vestry of parish or con-
gregation of mission station fail to elect a
delegate, any layman present from such parish
or station who may be present at the conven-
ton and who is qualified by section
3, may be appointed delegate by the bishop
with the consent Of the standing committee, if
such committee be accessible, if not, by the
bishop alone. Any delegates so appointed,
not exceeding the limits, to be entitled to all
rights and privileges as if regularly elected.
The recommendations were divided and
section four was carried.
The Rev. w. Fuller objected to section 5,
inasmuch as it asks the parish too much and
they went begging for representation. He
considered it an honor to occupy seat there,
and that should be the general feeling.
Dean Richardson objected to the standing
committee having voice in the matter, and
moved that the clause referring to them be
stricken out Mr.. Tays moved that the re-
port be referred back to the committee, on
which Mr.. Waleder said that ifrefered back to
the committee they would report in the same
way unless instructed by the convocation to do
otherwise. DR.. Clark saw no utility in renting
it back to the committee. After some remarks
from Dean Richardson, the motion to recon-
nit was withdrawn, and Dean Richardson's
amendment carried. General Young pointed
out that the object of section five was to secure
proper representation to every parish or mis-
sion which failed to elect a delegate. Why
not carry the spirit of that design still further
and give the same privilege to every parish
who, having elected their delegates, were
not representa- at the convocation. Why
not in such case if suitable man be present
should he not be nominated by the bishop and
being endorsed by the convention, allow him
to represent his parish or mission. 1t was
simply carrying the idea little farther. There
may be objections to this, but it seemed very
necessary. Vestries would often elect men
who could not and would not come, and it
might often happen that the parish or mission
would fail to cleo: their representative. But
it would in most cases be the failure Of the
elected parties to attend, which would cause
deficient representatives clothing the bishop
with power to nominate, would do good and
could do no harm. They were simply extending
the amendment in the spirit proposed.
Dean Richardson did not think thatGeneral
Young's notion was good in Legislative
sense, but in this work they met for friendly
conference and loving salutation, and he
thought the amendment should be passed.
The Bishop called attention to the fact that
Gen. Young's amendment introduced new
principle. Where no election had been held
the appointing power was decidedly good, but
where an election had been held the matter
required most careful consideration. The
Rev. Mr.! Fuller objected to the amendment
and thought it would have an injurious effect.
They wanted to impress Upon every man
a sense of the individual responsibility he had
in the church work. The convocation had
!. Ia -