to the Bishops of the Church the spiritual oversight of congregations not in communion with the Church, allowing the Bishops to provide services for them other than those of the Book of Common Prayer.  This subject was debated at length, and at last, to harmonise all interests, a Committee of Conference was appointed from both Houses.  Finally the Committee reported two resolutions for adoption,—­the first, that Article X of the Constitution is to be so interpreted as not restricting the authority of the Bishops, acting under the Canons of the General Convention, to provide special forms of worship; and the second, that the Bishops have the right to take under their spiritual oversight congregations of Christian people not in union with the Church, and that the use of the Book of Common Prayer is not obligatory for such congregations, but no such congregations shall be admitted into union with a Diocesan Convention until organised as a Parish and making use of the Book of Common Prayer.  The first was adopted, and the second lost.  Dr. Huntington then arose and moved a reconsideration of the vote on the Report of the Committee of Conference.  Having made his motion, he said, with evident feeling and pathos in his voice:  “I may perhaps be allowed in advocating this motion to say a single word of a personal character, or partially of a personal character.  I desire to say that I entertain the same faith in the final victory of the principles which I have had the honour to advocate in three previous Conventions that I ever have entertained.  Individuals may rebuke me because of too great persistency and because of too much presumption.  Great measures, if I may be pardoned in using a political phrase, may be turned down for the time.  They cannot be turned down for all time.  You have chosen your course for the present with reference to the great question of the opening century.  I acquiesce.  I resign to younger hands the torch.  I surrender the leadership which has been graciously accorded me by many clerical and lay members of this House.  The measure I advocated has been known as the iridescent dream.  I remember who they were who said, we shall see what will become of his dream.  In time they saw.  But for the present it is otherwise.  The Chicago-Lambeth platform has been turned down, and what I hope I may characterise without offence as the Oxford-Milwaukee platform is for the time in the ascendant.  I accept the fact.  My ‘iridescent dream’ shall disturb their dreams no more.  I recall a saying of my old friend Father Fidele, whom we used to know in our college days as James Kent Stone.  When he went over to Rome he wrote a book with the title, ‘The Invitation Heeded,’ and the best thing in it was this:  ’I thank heaven that I have reached a Church where there is no longer any nervousness about the General Convention.’  There is no probability, sir, of my heeding the invitation that he heeded, but henceforth I share his peace.”  The motion to reconsider the vote by which the first