Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1895-11-27
the old constitution for ten years, how
ever injurious some of its provisions may

the old constitution for ten years. how
ever injurious some Of its provisions may
be.
I'm the next place it is submitted that
the power Of making its own constitution
resides il every diocese, unless 1t is eX-
pressly, and by language, the meaning of
which cannot be disputed. deprived of this
power by the constitution of the general
convention. Now, the primary convention
IS the representative body in which, for the
time, the sovereign powers of the diocese
reside, whole and entire. 1t is charged
with the duty of organizing the new do
ceSe, ard therefore it should have the pow
to so organize it as the highest inter-
ests of the diocese demand. The general
convention, through article V, gives it d
law whereby TO organize itself, but does
not take from ii the power to organize the
diocese by determining its fundamental
law. At least there can be no question
that If such were The intention of the gen
eral convention, that intention should be
clearly and unequvocally expressed and
such is not the case.
Not Intended TO Cripple the Diocese.
1T was never intended TO in any way lin
it or cripple The newly born diocese, when
once organized in an orderly manner, in the
exercise of its inherent right to make its
own organic law. Accordingly, the general
convention added clause expressly affirm
ing this right, and declared that the old con-
stitution should only be operative until the
convention should alter it. But 1t is OBJ
jected that in respect to altering the do
cesar constitution, the two dioceses, the
parent and the daughter. are placed by arti
Gle ) on complete equality, so that If the
cid diocese cannot alter the constitution
save by the action of two ensuing conveil-
lions, it follows that neither can the new
diocese exercise that power in any other
way.
This, however. disproves itself, for arti-
Gle says nothing whatever about the meth
cd In which the respective doceses shall
proceed in altering the constitution 1t only
affirms that they are both bound by the old
constitution until the same may be altered
in either diocese by the convention thereof
How it may be altered in each or in either
case, the article does not specify. That is
matter that must be determined by the
positions they respectively occupy, and the
powers which are therein implied. Are those
positions identical in the case of the old and
the new diocese? Surely not. For the old
diocese has adopted an organic law, which,
in this particular limits and conditions its
action. 1t has voluntarily imposed upon it
self a restriction requiring that no amend
ment to the constitution shall have the force
of law unless it shall nave been approved
by two succeeding conventions.
Powers of an Independent Diocese.
But the same is not true of the new do
cese. 1t occupies a quite different position,
and is possessed of quite different powers.
1t is in the first stage of its being, ard has
not yet imposed upon itself any such re-
strictions as those just alluded to. 1t stands,
therefore, possessed of all the powers of an
Independent diocese, whole, entire and UNI
abridged. Accordingly, it may proceed in
altering the constitution Professionally, given
it by the general convention, in the exercise
of its sovereign power according to its own
Judgment of the best method. The PROPOSE
ton cannot be for moment entertained
that the new diocese, in the primary ex-
ercise of it's self-or ganzng power, is fet-
tered by conditions imposed by the old
diocese, to which it's consent has been
neither asked nor given"
In Favor Of the Old Order.
To the Editor of The evening Star:
1t is proposed by some that at the pri-
mary convention now near at hand certain
organic principles established in the pres
ent laws of the diocese of Maryland should
be aummarily set aside; that radical
changes may Immediately be made in the
rules for choosing a bishop and in the
composition CT a standing committee. There
seems determination on the part of some
to force these changes through
The chief aim is to set aside the rule
which requires vote of two-thirds for
the choice CT one to be bishop, and to
make it practicable at once, at this con-
vention, to elect by the vote of a simple
majority" We do rot want 10 argue the
advantage of sucn charge, il lawfully
many others as we'll as for ourselves when
we declare that such action at the coming
convention would be absolutely illegal and
void.
The supreme law OF the church set forth
by the general convention has provided q
constitution for the rev diocese. 1t de-
clares that the new diocese "shall be sub
ject to the constitution and canons of the
diocese which was divided. except as local
circumstances may prevent, until the same
may be altered in either diocese by the
convention thereof"
There are no local circumstances" which
prevent the application of the presen. rule
as to the election of bishop the COM
position of the standing committee. Local
circumstances" forbid the division of the
diocese into four convocationS; they make
it impossible to constitute the board of
missions under the present rule. But it
would be a dishonora BILE perversion of the
real meaning and intent of article of the
constitution of the general convention quot
ed above to claim that local circum-
stances" prevent the enforcement of the
two-thirds rule.
That constitution to which the new do
cese is thus made Subject declares and
limits the way in which it may be alter
ed" 1t cannot be doTe at one convention
1t must be the deliberate action of two
successive conventions, having, previous to
final action, been submitted to the vtstries
for their consideration.
Those who earnestly favor the change of
the two-thirds rule should the more insist
that 1t be made without the shadow of a
doubt as to the regularit and lawfulness
of the way in which it is done. And SO we