Evening star., 1895-05-30
A NEW DIOCESE
Episcopal Convention Votes in Favor
of Division.
END OF 4 LONG DISCUSSION
Question Now to Go to the Gen.
eraI Convention.
LAST NIGHTS ATE

The plan Of dividing the diocese Of Mary
land into two dioceses was carried by an
overwhelming majority at the session Of
the Episcopal diocesan convention last
evening. The motion was not put until a
late hour and after protracted discussion.
When the final vote was taken only five
were recorded against it.
The new diocese of Washington is to con-
sist of the District of Columbia and four
counties of Maryland-Prince Georges, ST.
Mary's, Charles and Montgomery counties.
1t Is needless to say that there is general
feeling Of satisfaction among the parishes
Of this city, as the division is provided for
exactly along the lines desired by local
churchmen.
All that now remains is to petition the
general convention of the church for a di-
vision, which will undoubtedly be granted
at its trIennial meeting in Minneapolis next
October.
The Afternoon Session.
Yesterday afternoon after The Stars re-
port of the diocesan convention closed the
committee on donations and bequests sub
mitted its report, which went at some
length into the matter of the Keerl be-
quests to the convention of Maryland.
These bequests amounted to over $3.50, 600
but the will of Mrs. Keerrs son. which left
part Of that sum, had been contested, and
the committee reported the plan of COM
promise which had been decided upon with
the surviving relatives of the dead man in
order to avoid contest. According to this
plan the convention would receive about
$4,000. This compromise plan had receiv-
ed favorable criticism from members of the
convention learned in the law, and the COM
mittee favored its adoption. The report
closed with a resolution providing for the
ny nfV,fv 0f 1to1 ,v,,tt
tie all the claims of the convention against
the estate of E. F. Keerl as might seem
most profitable to them.
The resolution was not acted upon at this
time, as 1t would have precipitated the gen.
eral discussion on division. 1t involved the
whole question of the apportioning Of the
accommodating funds between the two pro-
posed dioceses Of Maryland and Washing
ton. One of the contestants of the will of
E. F. keerl was his aunt, Miss Donald, who
offered to deed to the convention, regard
less of Its legal claim. a certain portion of
the bequest, reserving to herself the right
to dictate In what way the funds should be
utilized.
If this report were adopted with its reso-
lution 1t would leave to Miss Donald the
power to give the bulk of the funds to the
ton, as a new diocese altogether. Some
opposition to the resolution was developed
on the part of those favoring division.
A Question of Order.
Bishop Paret ruled that the resolutions
asking for division, embodied in DR.. Nc
kim's report, were not germane to the
subject assigned to the committee, and
that, in order to come before the conven-
tion, they must be formally introduced.
There was some little discussion as to
which resolutions had the right of way,
those of Mr.. Skipworth Wilmer, as chair
man of the committee on donations and be-
quests, or those which DIR. McKim was
anxious to bring up. Bishop Paret decided
In favor of the committee on donations
and beQuests. An amendment to the reso-
luton was adopted, to the effect that no
special committee should be appointed, but
that the whole matter should be left to the
committee which had already handled it
with such ability and success. Rev. DIR.
Mackay Smith submitted an amendment
providing that the proposed diocese Of
w ashington be recognized on the commit
tee, but this amendment was not carried.
Mr.. Carter of Baltimore explained at
some length the conditions which surround
the bequest, pointing out that If the COM
promise were not accepted without delay
1t would result in the convention getting
take steps looking to the securing of the
money, about $4,000, than If they spent
their time trying to devise a way in which
the funds can be equitably divided.
Mr.. Carter in his position. The money, he
said, did not belong to the convention nor
to the heirs-at-law. 1t Is in litigation and
the convention should be grateful to Miss
Donald for deciding so large an amount
and should realize that a donor has the
perfect right to do as he or she will with
his own.
Mr.. VIM a Meloy submitted an amend
ment providing for the addition of the
name of Bishop Paret to the committee on
donations and beQuests, to which COM
mittee should be left plenary powers in the
way OF settling the whole problem.
fhn Pioh rot
made few remarks on the subject. He
paid high tribute to the services Of the
committee and especially to Its chairman
Mr.. Wilmer. Its proposition, he said, was
far more satisfactory then he had hoped
for and he earnestly urged the adoption of
the proposed compromise. He knew the
two women referred to and he knew them
to be the best of friends to the church and
to say how the funds should be disposed
Of.
The question: with its amendments was
put and carried by unanimous vote.
The Division of Legacies.
Rev. DR.. McKim then moved that a COM
mittee of twelve, three laymen and three
clergy. from each Of the proposed dioceses,
be appointed to consider and report at the
earliest moment what proportion should
be adopted in the division of any legacies
to which the convention of the diocese Of
Maryland may have become entitled by the
terms of any will or cOdicil thereto the
testator being deceased), between January
l. 1894, and May /, 1895, and that the re-
port of the committee of twelve above
named should be the order of the day at
8 pm.
Dr. McKim made an appeal that the
whole matter of finances and the division
Of funds should be settled in committee
room rather than on the floor of the con-
vention.
The Curt Before the Horse.
Rev. DR.. Grammer of Baltimore took the
ground that they were getting the cart
before the horse in discussing division
of the funds before deciding to divide the
diocese itself. He suggested instead that
they should first act upon the resolution
to divide the diocese and postpone for the
time being the discussion of the financial
side of the question. After some discussion
as to which phase of the question should
be taken up first and a few closing words
from the bishop, Rev. DR.. -McKim withdrew
bis resolution. He thereupon introduced
resolution which provided in detail for the
division of the diocese.
In a few earnest remarks DR.. Mckim
spoke in favor of his resolution, outlining
the results of the meeting held Tuesday
evening of the clerical and lay delegates
from Washington and the four counties of
Maryland in question. They were in favor
of keeping the Maryland counties in the
diocese of Washington. He himself would
oppose division if diocese were formed out
b. aF ,vr,tnt ntn a1n