Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1896-05-28
TW0-THIRDS RULE
Prolonged Discussion on the Way to
Elect a Bishop.
SECOND DAY OF DIOCESAN CONVENTION
Strong Support for the Majority
Rule.
FULL PROC EEDIN G S

ton began this morning at Trinity Church,
Sd and c streets.
Morning prayer was said by Rev. Alfred
Harding assisted by Rev. A. NJ. Rich.
About half-past 10, when the bishop called
the convention to order, there was good
attendance Of delegates and also of specta
tors. The reading of the minutes Of the
three sessions of yesterday occupied con-
siderable time, and then a resolution pro-
viding that the Office Of chancellor Of the
diocese be created was referred to the COM
mittee on canons.
A resolution Of thanks. on motion of Rev.
DR.. Mckim, to Rev. Mr.. Barr for his part
in securing the gavel presented yesterday to
the bishop, was adopted; resolution, in
troduced by A. s. Browne, was also adopt
ed, directing the committee on canons to
report to the next convention canons gov
erning the action of the committee on
church charities, donations and episcopal
fund.
The order of the day was then taken up,
which was the report of the committee on
the revision of the constitution. canons,
rules of order and order of business, and
the chairman. Rev. DIR. Mckim. took the
floor and called the attention of the con-
vention to a number of proposed changes
III the constitution. Perhaps the most i'm
portant was the proposed charge in the
rule relating to the election of bishop. MAX
thirds, as now is the rule
The Proposition Supported.
DR.. McKim referred to the fact that a
large majority Of the dioceses of the coun-
try had such a rule, and he thought that
the statement made that the wo-thirds
rule prevented the election Of bishop of
party was not borne out by the exper-
lence in other dioceses. He advocated
l. ha ma tort II, ,ci,,
pre- vailed in this country. The speaker re-
TERED to paper written in advocacy Of
the two-t5irdS rule, and said the author
asserted that there were peculiar conditions
IN this diocese which made the two thirds
rule necessary. He, however said Dr. Nc
n I'm, failed to mention those peculiar con-
dltions,' and as for himself. he was ontire-
ly ignorant of such coniitions He denied
that the two-thirds rule resulted in secur-
Ing better bishop than the majority rule
tie reviewed the history Of the election of
bishops in the diocese of Maryland in sup
port of this statement and cited one case
where four delegates prevented a majority
CT the delegates from selecting the man OF
their choice, and in another case the dio-
cese was deprived of the services of a bish-
Op for three years owing to the fa ailura "a
eject. These results the speaker said we're
due to the tWo-thirds rule, which defeats
the Will of the majority, gives the minority
a dangerous power, and invites strife and
dissension.
Upon the conclusion of DR.. McKim's adj
dress. which was followed with the kcencst
interest by the delegates, a motion was
adopted to limit the debate by allowing
llFe minutes to each speaker, it being nm
derstood that such limitation should not he
applied to Mr.. A. S. Browne, who was
recognized as representing those in favor
of the two-thirds rule
Mr.. Browne said at the outset that Dr
Mckim had in the course of his remarks
referred to a paper which the speaker had
written ana had distributed, which repre-
sented his views on this subject. Mr.
Browne then took up the various objections
made to the two-tIirds rule. He denied
that more time was consumed in an cleo
uon under the two-thirds rule. In his
opinion the instances from the history of
the diocese of Maryland mentioned by DR.
Mckim as reasons why the majority rule
should be adopted were arguments in favor
Of the two-thirds rule.
Urges COnservatfsm
1t was better, said the speaker, that a
diocese should be without a bishop for
time. If when election was reached the
man chosen should be acceptable generally
throughout the diocese. He believed in so
conducting an election that there should
be harmonv when it was over. He denied
that the two-thirds rule enables minority
to dictate. and he also questioned the ac-
curacy of terming the majority rule the
American rule.
He then spoke of the growing interest in
this country in the doctrine of the pro-
lection of the rights of the minority and
referred to the peculiar conditions in this
diocese, where, he said the different schools
OF thought are very evenly balanced in
numbers and for this reason the two-thlrds
rule Is OF great Importance. He thought
that the majority rule led to the introduc-
ton of politics into an election. and pre-
vented that calm consideration which is so
necessary in a matter of such Importance
as the choice of bishop.
TIa II
announcement Of a special order. namely,
the election of the members Of the stand
ing committee, to consist of four clergy
men and three laymen. Tellers were ap-
pointed to take the vote of the clergy and
the laity, and the roll was called the
delegates came forward and deposited their
ballots.
The names of those nominated at the ses-
sion yesterday were printed on ballots as
follows:
Clergy-Revs. J. H. Elliott, s. T. D.: r.
H. McKim, ID; Alex. Mackay-Smth, d.
D.; Walter A: Mitchell. Alfred Harding.
Johnstone. Albert r. Stuart, DID
Laity-A. S. Browne, c.. H. Stanley, w.
B. Baldwin, Chas. Albert. F. Sasscer, E. N.
Waters; NJ: Church. W. A. Meoy. R. B. b.
Chew, ]. G. E. Davis.
The tellers to take the vote of the clergy
were Revs. George +. Dudley and Robert
S. w. Wood; for the laity, B. Bryan and H.
c. Whiting
bishop announced the appointment of Mr.
Thomas Hyde as chairman of the commit
tee on ways and means, in place of Mr. II
E. Pellew, resigned.
TwO-Thirds Rule Again Discussed.
Consideration of the amendment was re-
sumed. and Mr.. Albert said that in his opin
len this amendment had been carried
through the primary convention under
pressure. the idea being that bishop
could not be chosen under the .wo-thirds
rule. He thought this was mistake.
He favored the retention Of the rule
The debate as it ran on served to empha-
size the arguments advanced on both sides.
One Of the clerical delegates said that he
opposed the two-thirds rule on high
church grounds. because it contained
subtle heresy, which seemed to establish a
new order. There seemed to be the idea
that two-thirds bishop, as he expressed
It, was better than bishop elected by
majority vote.
Rev. Dr. Buck and Rev. Mr.. Perry made
earnest speeches in opposition to the pro-
posed change
After remarks by Rev. Dr. Stuart, who