morning, the author was taken aside, before the meeting, by Mr. Benjamin Moore; who expressed the wish of himself and others, that nothing should be urged further on the subject; as they found themselves peculiarly circumstanced, in consequence of their having joined the clergy of Connecticut in their application for the consecration of a bishop. This brought to the knowledge of the clergy from Philadelphia, what they had not known, that Dr. Samuel Seabury of the state of New York, who had sailed for England just before the evacuation of New York by the British troops, carried with him a petition to the English bishops for his consecration.

In consequence of the measure taken as above stated, the gentlemen concerned in it thought, that during the pending of their application, they could not consistently join in any proceedings, which might be construed to interfere with it. Accordingly, the conversation of that day-on which the meeting ended-was principally confined to the business of the revival of the corporation for the relief of the widows and the children of the clergy; which had been held out, as an additional object of the interview.* But before the clergy parted, it was agreed to procure as general a meeting as might be, of representatives of the clergy and of the laity of the different states, in the city of New York, on the 6th of October following. The gentlemen of New York were

* This corporation, by mutual consent, and with a fair partition of the funds, has since resolved itself into three corporations, under charters from the three states.

to notify the brethren eastward; and those of Philadelphia were to do the same southward.

The author remarked at this meeting, that, notwithstanding the good humour which prevailed at it, the more northern clergymen were under apprehensions of there being a disposition on the part of the more southern, to make material deviation from the ecclesiastical system of England, in the article of church government. At the same time he wondered, that any sensible and well informed persons should overlook the propriety of accommodating that system, in some respects, to the prevailing sentiments and habits of the people of this country; now become an independent and combined commonwealth.

For the application of the clergy of Connecticut to the archbishop of York, the English primacy having become vacant, and the successor to it being not yet known in America; see Appendix No. 2.

D. Page 11. Of the Meeting in New York, in October 1784.

There were present from Massachusetts, the Rev. Mr. Parker; from Connecticut, the Rev. Mr. Marshall; from New York, the Rev. Messrs. Provoost, Beach, B. Moore, Bloomer, Cutting, T. Moore, and the Hon. James Duane, Marinus Willet, and J. Alsop, Esquires; from New Jersey, the Rev. Mr. Ogden, and John De Hart, John Chetwood, Esquires, and Mr. Samuel Spragg; from Pennsylvania, the Rev.

Drs. White and Magaw, the Rev. Mr. Hutchins, and Matthew Clarkson, Richard Willing, Samuel Powell, and Richard Peters, Esquires; from Delaware, the Rev. Messrs. Thorne and Wharton, and Mr. Robert Clay; from Maryland, the Rev. Dr. Smith; and from Virginia, the Rev. Mr. Griffith. The Rev. Dr. Smith presided, and the Rev. B. Moore was secretary. The names of the members are set down, because they do not appear on the subsequent journals; and because the short printed account of the proceedings of this meeting was in very few hands at the time, and is probably at this time generally destroyed or lost.

The present meeting, like that in May, is here spoken of as a voluntary one, and not an authorized convention; because there were no authorities from the churches in the several states, even in the appointments of the members; which were made from the congregations, to which they respectively belonged; except of Mr. Parker, from Massachusetts, of Mr. Marshall, from Connecticut, and of those who attended from Pennsylvania: even from these states, there was no further authority, than to deliberate and propose. Accordingly, the acts of the body were in the form of recommendation and proposal.

The principles of ecclesiastical union, recommended at the meeting, September 1784, are as fol

lows:

1st. That there shall be a general convention of the episcopal church, in the United States of America.

2d. That the episcopal church, in each state, send deputies to the convention, consisting of clergy and laity.

3d. That associated congregations, in two or more states, may send deputies jointly.

4th. That the said church shall maintain the doctrines of the Gospel, as now held by the church of England; and shall adhere to the liturgy of the said church, as far as shall be consistent with the American revolution, and the constitutions of the respective states.

5th. That in every state, where there shall be a bishop duly consecrated and settled, he shall be considered as a member of the convention er officio.

6th. That the clergy and laity, assembled in convention, shall deliberate in one body; but shall vote separately: and the concurrence of both shall be necessary, to give validity to every measure.

7th. That the first meeting of the convention shall be at Philadelphia, the Tuesday before the feast of St. Michael next; to which it is hoped, and earnestly desired, that the episcopal churches in the several states will send their clerical and lay deputies, duly instructed and authorised to proceed on the necessary business herein proposed for their deliberation.

The above resolves were, in substance, what had been determined on in Pennsylvania, in May; and after having been discussed and accommodated in a committee, were adopted by the assembly.

It is proper to remark, that although a clergyman appeared at this meeting, on the part of the church in Connecticut, it is not to be thought, that there was an obligation on any in that state, to support the above principles; because Mr. Marshall read to the assembly a paper, which expressed his being only empowered to announce, that the clergy of Connecticut had taken measures for the obtaining of an episcopate; that until their design, in that particular, should be accomplished, they could do nothing; but that as soon as they should have succeeded, they would come forward, with their bishop, for the doing of what the general interests of the church might require.

With this exception, the principles laid down appeared to be the sense of the meeting: and it seemed a great matter gained, to lay what promised to be a foundation for the continuing of the episcopal church, in the leading points of her doctrine, discipline, and worship; yet with such an accommodation to local circumstances, as might be expected to secure the concurrence of the great body of her members; and without any exterior opposition, to threaten the oversetting of the scheme.

At the present day, it may seem to have been of little consequence, to gain so considerable an assent, to what was determined at this meeting. But at the time in question, when the crisis presented a subject of deliberation entirely new, it was difficult to detach it in the minds of many, from a past habitual train of thinking. Some were startled at the very cir