The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1904-10-15
DIVORCE CANON VOTED DOWN,
EPISCOPAL DEPUTIES REFUSE
TO FORBID REMARRIAGE.

The Vote Was Oh 10 81 and Does Not
Fairly Represent the Sentiment OF the
Observation-Disclosures That Next Con.
yention VIII show Different Resplt.
BosToN, Dot. 4.-After Ave days dis
cussion OF the proposed new canon rela ting
to the marriage OF divorced persons. the
House OF Deputies Of the Episcopal Cen
eral Convention. by a vote Of 81 TO IS. this
afternoon refused to adopt the amend
ment forbidding the marriage Of divorced
persons by the clergy Of the Church. The
remainder Of the proposed canon was laid
upon the table upon motion Of the Rev.
Alfred Harding OF Washington, and the
question Is settled 30 far as the present
convention Ia concerned.
The action OF the deputies created con-
siderable surprise, In view OF the vote OF
the house, sitting as a committee OF the
whole, to repart the proposed amendment
to the house. This vote was taken only
few hours previously, the count showing
that PA delegates favored the presentation
Of the report to the house, while 191 were
opposed to such action.
In securing the opinion the delegates from
the missionary districts were allowed to vote.
but when the question was taken up by the
House Of Deputies 1t was voted upon only
by dioceses and orders, under which rule
the missionary delegates had no voice.
What defeated the amendment was the
diversity of opinion in some OF the clerical
delegations. In ten dioceses, the clerical
delegates were divided In their opinion
regarding the advisability OF adopting the
new amendment, and these votes, according
to the rule, not being in the affirmative,
were counted in the negative. In the lay
order there were six divided dioceses and
these votes were counted as against the
amendment.
The result Of the voting shows that since
the convention held in San Francisco three
years ago there has been a steady growth
of sentiment in both the clerical and lay
orders for the adoption of more extreme
measures in regard to divorce and marriage.
The Rev. F. p. Davenport Of Memph is,
Tenn, chairman of the committee on canons.
who led the fight for the adoption Of the
new canon, is Of the opinion that the Epis-
copal Church will eventually forbid re-
marriage.
This is a question that will mot down.
said he after adjournment 1.-THE condi-
the people to this matter more and more,
until We finally get it through. and while
l was not confident that we would be able
feel assured that the next convention will
be still more in favor Of it,
The morning session was devoted to
debate on the subject. and at noon the
vote upon the question OF whether the dele
~ - . hNx ~A<>IA
should report the resolution to the House
OF Deputies was taken. When the after
noon session opened, IL was decided to
hear arguments upon the question and
take q vote at 4:45. Chief Justice Stiness
OF Rhode Island was the first to argue In
favor OF the amendment. He said:
I'VE are too we'll aware OF the scandal
which has come to the Church In attempting
to find out which Is the innocent party in
these cases. We do not have to 60 outside
Of some Of the dioceses which are repre-
sented here to recall a most notable case.
-In the case Of remarriage, which this
Church allows at the present time, you
prevent all possibility Of reconciliation.
The more alarming feature and evil under
the present canon is that divorces are in
creasing at a rapid rate.
Another menace is the effect it has on
the rising generation. Think Of the thou
sands of children growing up around US
who are living to see their fathers and
mothers living with some other spouse
1 see no way Of preventing the evil but in
refusing to marry divorced persons. Cut
out the remarriege and you will reach the
root OF the great evil which threatens this
Church"
Francis L. Stetson Of New York said:
1.-THE settlement Of this question Is the
most important thing the people owe to
the Church and the Church to the country.
How much remedy has been offered by the
old canon, which has been in existence
since 1850, toward stopping this swell
ling tide Of evil? 1t Is plain that We
should have a substitute Let us deliver
these growing little ones from having two
fathers and two mothers. 1t is our right
to say when and how our priests shall per-
form the marriage ceremony
How many Of you clergymen can say
that you have not violated the rule Of the
Church in performing these remarriages?
How do you know that one OF the parties
whom you have married is not in reality
the guilty party? After ali, the real diff
0CuIty lies DICK III tHt HdTTidBc' ulo
am not sure but that We should make
marriage harder and more difficult Of
Obtaining
Joseph Packard Of Maryland said: THE
present canon says that adultery is gross
and hideous crime. The proposed canon
puts it on a level with incompatibility of
temper or desertion or any Of the other
causes for which divorces are granted.
IF the canon is in accordance with the
word OF God and the prayer book is not,
as some Of the speakers have said, think
It would be better to change the prayer
book
The Rev. DR.. Parks of New York said
that he didn't think 1t is impossible TO secure
evidence ofinnocence, assome OF the speakers
had feared. He added:
while we have been discussing this ques-
ton we have been listened to by many
women, and just want to tell you that
since / have been here l have received
a letter from woman In which she said
that she WAS amazed at the lack of tender
ness and charity which has been shown in
this debate. Thank God, ! have always