Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1895-12-04

be regarded binding on the delegates in
convention, the conference being for the
purpose merely of discussing the situation
and reaching some general consensus Of
opinion.
There were upward of a hundred lay and
clerical delegates in attenuance at the meet
ing. which was presided over by Rev. DR..
Addison, the rector of Trinity Church. The
debate of the evening was precipitated by
one of the lay delegates, Mr.. l.. A. Wilmer,
who introduced resolution expressing 1t as
the sense of the meeting that the laity
should be given representation on the stand
ing committee. This gave rise to some argu-
Elent, but was carried after full and fair
discussion Rev. A. r. Stuart of Christ
Church, Georgetown, then made short
speech. urging the need of tolerance and
charity in the deliberations of a church con-
vention, especially when such important
questions as the adoption of the constitu-
ton and the choice of a bishop were to be
acted upon.
The second proposition, providing that the
laity should have a voice in the election of
bishop, voting concurrently, was carried
with little or no opposition.
The TwO-Thirds Rule.
1t was the third proposition, providing for
majority vote in elections that gave rise
to the liveliest debates of the evening. The
discussion was started by Rev. DIR. McKim.
who spoke briefly on the reasons that favor
ed such change in the organic law of the
diocese. He insisted that q two-thlrds vote
s. not in accord with the sentiments of
republican people, and said that the only
way for the convention to command respect
among Americans was to adopt the Ameri
can plan of a majority rule DIR. Mackay-
Smith of st. Johns also favored the propo-
sition and made an earnest speech seconding
the arguments raised by DR.. McKim.
That the meeting was not unanimous in
its consideration of this question was quick
ly evident, for DIR. j. b. Perry, rector of st.
Andrews Church, opposed the proposition at
some length He said that he did not believe
the new diocese had the power to change its
constitution at the primary meeting, and
reviewed the proceedings of ether conven-
tons to show that there was no precedeSt
for such action. He expressed his belief that
the convention had no right to consider the
question of a change of constitution, adding
that the question had already been rejected
by sessions of the Maryland diocese
DIR. McKim answered at some length, dis
GUESSING the various points raised by DR..
Perry and detailing the circumstances under
which the proposed change in the consttu-
ton had been rejected by the diocese of
Maryland to show that il did not properly
express the opinion of the diocese as whole.
AT this point it was suggested that the dis
CuSSion was hardly in order at this time
and DIR. Addison sustained the objection
This brought to an end the argument on the
third proposition, and when it was put to a
vote 1t was carried by 20 to 30. Shortly after
the NEE ting adjourned. but the general feel
iIg that the arguments might be re-
sumed with even more feeling on the floor
of the convention
1t is understood that a proposition has
been actively discussed among the delegates,
and has been received with some favor, to
provide for the appointment of a nominating
committee, which shall name candidate for
the bishopric. According to the plan this
committee shall be representative Of all the
factions in the convention.