The San Francisco call. [volume] (San Francisco [Calif.]) 1895-1913, 1895-10-04
FOR CHRISTIAN UNITY,
Continued from First Page.

Of the House of Bishops was the adoption
of resolution approving by implication
the suppression of the Fitzsimmons-
Corbett fight by the Texas Legislature
Bishop Doane of Albany was placed in
episcopal charge of the church and congre-
cations in continental Europe.
When the delegates met in committee of
the whole after the midday recess a code
of rules designed to prevent a repetition
of the parliamentary tangle in which the
morning session had involved itself was
adopted, and thereafter there was smooth
sailing. Debate was inaugurated upon
the proposition to adopt the declaration,
and verbal changes were presented by
Delegates Taylor of Springfield, ILL.,, and
Scott of Virginia. DR.. Spalding of Ala
bama took the ground that no declaration
was necessary. There were, he said, suffi-
cient number of atfirmations of faith in
the prayer-book. DR.. Beverly Tucker of
Virginia concurred. DR.. Elliott of Mary
land urged that it was serious question
whether the General Convention had
power to establish new constitution
until expressly instructed to do so by the
diocesan conventions. Under the pre-
cedence of the general conventions of
1886 aud 1879 it certainly had no such
power. He appealed to the delegates as
to whether they had been empowered to
set forth, establish or adopt new law for
the church, and there was great shout
of mo"
The debate was continued by Drs Egar,
New York. Froude, Minnesota; Daven-
port, Tennessee; and Ex-Governor Brad
ford Prince of New Mexico, all opposing
approval of the declaration. Finally, DR..
Tucker moved that it be stricken out, but
gave way to Lay Delegate Hill Burgwin,
one of the oldest and most skilled parlia-
mentarians in the house and who voiced
the opposition in resolution setting forth
that lit was not desirable that any pre-
amble or declaration should precede the
constitution now submitted for action"
This was adopted almost unanimously by
viva voce vote and the minority did not
care to challenge a division.
The constitution itself was now before
the convention and by vote of 147 to 104
it was decided to pluralize it by calling it
constitutions. On the proposal to sub
stitute the title general synod for "gen-
eral convention" DR.. Jewell of Milwaukee
made vigorous speech. 1t was, he said,
an Eastern term, ana one not used by the
Western church. The so-calIed Presbv-
terians used it to designate a secondary
body, and in that church it was kind of
third wheel. The so-called Lutherans also
used it, and in his parish there were no less
than four Lutheran synods and all of them
by the ears.
DR.. Carpenter of New Jersey favored the
term general council" while DR.. Weber
OF Fon du Lac suggested national coun-
Gil" Dean Carmichael OF Virginia was in
clined to blush at seeing Americans will
ing to deny their own institutions and
their own name, and urged that any
change would be monstrosity. A fervid
speech against the change was made by
DR.. Fulton of Philadelphia.
When the vote was taken the 'icouncil'
amendments were defeated, and the pro-
posal OF the committee to adopt the desig-
nation general synod" met a similar fate