The daily morning journal and courier. [volume] (New Haven, Conn.) 1894-1907, 1897-10-28


est and shown decided difference of
opinion in the diocese The one is the
question of division of the diocese,
brought before the convention by the
Bishop in 1865; the other is a somewhat |
curious episode which occurred in 1871. |
AT the first convention which Bishop |
Williams addressed as Bishop of Con-
necticut, the first, that is to say, after !
the death of Bishop Brownell, he spoke |
in very solemn words of the duty of |
looking forward to the erection of a |
new See within this present diocese.
F." 1 do not say continued the bishop, |
that we ought to take up the matter
to-day, it may be not even next year.
But I do trust that we may keep 1t in
our minds as a thing to be harmonious
ly and considerably accomplished at
no very distant day. 1t is be-
cause of the awful responsibilities of
the episcopate which rest upon me; 1t
Is because / see work growing up be-
foro me which l shall be unable to do
and yet for which fear / am account
albeit is because of souis that will be
perishing, that l ask you TO think OF
this. Liberari amman meam.'
This part of the bishops address
was referred to committee Of four
clergymen and five laymen, the Rev.
DR.. Mead and Judge Samuel HI. Hun
tington being the first named in each
order, respectively, to report at some
later convention This committee pre-
scented partial report In 1866, declar-
ing that they thought it wise to pre-
sent the important subject of divi-
| etc Sc 1,a 20 ln CT dnr
| of clergy and laity, as matter which
may happen at no distant day, that
which may be excited to a timely ex-
animation of such a momentous event
in the history of the church in Con-
necticut, so as to be amply prepared to
act whenever the time for action may
have fully come Then, after sug-
costing that the endowment Of the
Berkeley Divinity school would enable
the bishop to undertake more extended
labors in the diocese, and speaking of
the canonical steps necessary for d.
vision, the report ended with these
words-there must be present others
besides myself who remember how they
rang from DR.. Mead's lips: Every
churchman in our land who admires
whatsoever is pure or honest or lovely
or of good report will cheerfully ex-
claim with u.s. " Diocese of Connecti-
cut, Nomen praeclarum, Este perpet-
um!"'
cat the convention of 1867 the COM
mittee presented it's f1nal report, call
ing attention to the fact that no at
tempt at combined effort to initiate
such measure for division had
taken place. intimating that it seemed
that most of those interested had been
led to the conclusion that our need of
division does not require action now,
and asking to be discharged from the
further consideration of the resolutions
submitted to Them Their request was
granted; and except in 1872, when a
resolution looking the increase of the
episcopate in this diocese was prompt
, ly laid on the table, it does not appear
, that the matter has again excited much
, | interest.
"An article in the Church Review
, about 1866 circulated in pamphlet
form, and acknowledged to be from the
, pen of one of the keenest controver-
sialists and most persistent advocates
of diocesan division in the church, I'M
| der the title Shall Connecticut Be Our
, First Province?' urged in the strongest
possible way that this diocese should
) be forthwith divided into five,, and
/ showed how the common interests
3 could be maintained under provincial
r system, the province being cotermi-
| nous with the state. The article was
l interesting as well in the principles
1 which it ably advocated, as in it's show.
' ing of the strength of the proposed di-
:, oceses of Hartford (this was the Me.
< tropoliticaD, New Haven, Bridgeport
r Litchfield and Norwich, and in partic
= ular that if st. MichaePs church coult
e be made the cathedral of Litchfield, i
: would have an endowment for the epis
J. copate second only to that of the dio
n cese of New York But all this doe:
d not seem to have been taken very seri
|, ously; and I venture to think that h,
= would be bold man who should renew
: the proposal for division of Connect
e cut in the immediate future
: THE other matter to which I alluded
: would deserve notice If it were only TO
= the fact that it was the occasion o
y two votes in the conventions by or
: ders, which have been demanded sine
: 1850, and besides those of 1850 the onl.
ones in our entire history. The resolu
e ton proposed, after preamble of sew
y eral clauses, was this: Resolved, tina
y in the judgment of this convention, it
/. not expedient to send as deputies t
e the general convention more than tw
IS members of the standing committee @
r the diocese. A motion to lay the Who'll
matter on the table was defeated, on
If vote by orders, twelve clergymen an
d six laymen voting for it; and on tn
n second day, the preamble having bee
n first stricken out, the resolution wa
vt adopted on vote by orders, by a larg
= majority of both clergymen and la
a delegates. The result was that where
re as three years before all the clerics
l. deputies to the general convention ha
.e been members of the standing commit
k tee, Drs. Mead and Beardsley were tn
S only ones now honored with this doubl
IF election. Thus passed away an ep
10 sode which at the time was somewha
lie irritating to some people, and the al
re was cleared, as the saying is, in
n wholesome manner.
to There are many matters to whic
to one would like to allude and of whic
it would be necessary to speak If or