New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1844-05-28
Meth odlst General Conference.
TwENTY-THlRD DAY-MoSpAr, May 9.

CASE OF BiS!cP ANDRE.
No other business bciag offered, the Conference
proceeded at nace with the ca>e q Bsho9 Andrew
Nh PORTER. OF the New England Conference
WISHED To mike .n explanation. lie bad remarked On 2atlf-
d=y lhai New England lad b-n ns.e'ei'iet Oh M eof
thu: ONLY one member ssoxcn d-uce and even ne
FAD apology icf dong - tie -=ii; atis7't'
y,r,!!c with nm and r-ndus b. Temnrhs reported 10 l
PaPsfs he ~. t.,gcei oi LIT P'ia: n! ne WIKI
= .,-h pc.5 iiz.lg made Tn, correction. be would ho
we ;. f6n rt az m y-el!ll, sfttcii IL defence OF New
t3s.Gd though I'll hoped Ta otlS.soi Ter SOS
would have "a opparulI;y 20 speak ~ her ashalf
NJ. fkCK sand he was much Obliged 10 me- 'f!9hd
or this ee=tleuuu: explanation
Mr. WfsASs SAID lac mus, also clam the indul-
:eaGe Of the Conference Ae he MAZE Dne M :
iell DAVIS. o. ; Baltimore Conference Of YhiGii nc na u
report gapeI except tie Her &C. lAhs
G.-.a 10, IA. r4rty ofcrrectu-, lie had remarked
that memory traacherucs. whereas The lleia4l ma re
had uch apuia;su upon that hIcthei nor tl ~
eEtefh'H ay sucn OPINION OF nm g' ~ 49, IN a. sd
IL ,,a ~. ft-,r - tho SsSsTgcard Conference. tie
intended ,scy de- coft!lry lie i,ed urGsf'o- iiat that
5r,ie ie,. naa;sa,e, D. Carer. 10; Rsi-o "a -, a7d ne
s:ae , ie.ia; = on rfz! y ei tsl ''''e' w..
i- memory inefded u appy not 10
hn bus @ ~ho had gwen nm MI v mans 'Le iaioiia
! iie-rrs. PlcKssING and DAVIS expressed them
selves ner.,.-ty satisfied win TINS panntlou .
/ VT. HANIISE, .! ONO. now took the moor. lie
ai he lad aot much expectation Of thrc"us isht upon
tie question, bore u beng able 10 draw attention % 'e
a,h Of anEnd stated V1s seemed 20 be The almost ui-
versa opou TINT tbs debate ,i AeG ah eNe5eisy Mius
range and embraced many remote vel - incGitai points,
-, to-. II M. rst.l moi succeed In aeepu. 70
tie question he hoped SOD would at least enable him - iaf 10
understand himself that he should lee inGGc 10 I'll down al
u :s ihe ,,ee lie eel issues presented by tbs case lie
in hr t.y vye. these liza, t,c:.-ri Conference pow.
az IN - M me ,,-r.tgt instance J;iI lire mt OF
le proposition, made out, al Arguments Ia d'Of c the
resolution On The OF eNpedecy were only 50 much rub
bh 10 t! question, tHc, IL W"Gi tsh me tttcht'
he Conference he understood iv resolution 10 be man
winch tile Z shop be liberty 10 comply with o: de-
gard pressure. L: wrong II is Ee would iiNe 70
lie Coaeded 1 the Conference mad the power
pncs. II WAS ~ exact GaoEy "lif si me
features 81 the ieti'is poiy lhe Class ls;J.r were --
biz 10 he removed h is preacher :. ii-e iti.oi'sf, e
Conference, even tloagl tey chat-s with immoral
conduct The 1ieoclsrn e-fe cYIS ai'9 De isn9s a. 90
i,r.. lie could be dsprci OF H. Tanh minister
49, true, Ll tic cout be oil l' Qice a. pl7tp nr re-
siding Elder. thcusha - Hscr c the pr 81 TIRE Bs'' p
could vet r. removed uy h:I from oice TIE Il sEOp go;
lerc.. ms ..cr ,yI;naa giving re..on e Bisuo ,y;is
"a. hi uic=. aluVn the JhIic aud ~ exempt
from responsibility ci attached 10 AL subordinate
olcers Waste wih ul h. power., not aaelgne To the
i-ty winch p'acc, aii IA t-rtan!. t.l would
not BE- pretended uud not ol power on r. pant do
II mus; oyou that the higher usre=d 10 the otcill r
ron the WIDER tee responsibility. end TIE mo= mpo'ts.t }, i
be aid that i=ervu, - l1=e the ui suspend
lepo,iH: B,hop the hand, 81 the General Confer
ence iiewoud a7k Il tie Dee-a'ss from the Annual Con-
nigh; 5e safely entrusted With tia, authority n
the several power Conferred upon them u gc:e apparent
assumed t!at tie relation between toe .osand Tie Gcns-
raj Conference was ana-urs Ia ihGt rNsns between the e
.Gea; Congress the United States Even must
reflection there rSe analogy between Tie to
the Whole ;;:er q the asansency ottba, @ics 10 the
regur,ed well nci!mtency ut The office Of President
runrr,s WHAT ,oId - >i # Cons,es, should undertake
10 maize ,,ra Pre.,ien Yet the General Conierri!ce had
elect any number o Bishops The term dunn. which
Pr-sdcu; coui h Office WAS iSed y constitutional pt'-
Not Bishop II hHl been aS>il'iHl ia, lie
elected Tor BE, but 40 imr Ned hy the Constitutions
office held the pleasure otte appointing power. When
he -pose OF the Constitution otthe Cnuc he meant not tos
pnrts Of Tie Discipline WHICH he General con'e;cce Ind maze
ard coud a!:er pet,ureha NJ, ""', the statute a By
those provisions winch could oc changed "y by the acton ol
the Annual Conferences.
legislative aph"u'y The Bishop 5ad no such nuthor'y-n
doubtful whether ne could Ste casting Noyu
= ,h i: a ~ No. ~ ,I, 'bu,rS ;bc co,I Hc
INC bIsho> o'i'ti III 'Sl III III "l,' ,',cl .'""
fact but gallery OF distributes. The: could
and ook on their hearts approving dsappfosis the
vute might he said Of them that when they went they
eat a.'f anl , M; H. VINE you are up fHe we III
Was the General Conference supreme matters o; admins
trton lie thought So but ne would utter no d'eia upon TIE
u'gect-hs otect simply to call forth the opinions OF 9th
csey, he thought. the rnron River supreme tie
summit level Of the iGucnri through winch IL Writers flowed
80 ys III srii ls, The Ga. conference , IN.
authority owed to MI the officer. nl the Church who nigh,
De represented under the figure Of r.eryo through whom
ever, ap1ment ot the Church reached he would
say that the Bishop uicer 81 the General Conference,
thousi int %rS ~ sense True 7iit r. Would ,ny that he WIS
tom ho- 81 tie General Conference. Tie lnrne boly had
only such powers expressed tie Constitution,
laws and fculaon- modified only By certain special re~lfic
II could Tie 81 rs authority refuse - elect
nY more Bishops until the dscease Oi all the present iacun
- 'I IL g''F, I s9 H. M; ;ye, ", iy ' Nv
rfr route rrpg Ifpu Them
but only ty statute. and that statute could le repealed. hy
suspension OF the rules IN i've minutes, II the Conference saw
tit Ia take ucI step.
lie hnd now reached point lbs argument, winch he
asked tie closest attention oi members lie ni down the doc
trEe a any power which the Conference could
all, could be exercised without previous declaration Of II
autofty ami he wse to hppiy ms doctrine TO the case BE-
~ ," o, INN IN he Restrictive irrrle. whici ph
blcd the removal SUSPENSION OF Bishop THIS would not
r. pretended and oi course nothing 10 III statute law rQud
deprive authority derived from ihe constitutions. sup
pu,e Congress should ~ some m2cnt pi igatun,on deny tit
had p1we; q lay lnpost' Would II be bound by ,uch
nigh; TIE power question
line very ney ,ay with the General Conference. sup.
poe our aw contained special provision declaring
ihcta Bishop could not be 'e1"'ei We should 81. hn'e
the Int To oroce. the o the conferred by
the own previous G-ciarunn - the colirny
Notwithstanding otherwise tr statute Jaw" made Dy "ii
selves ouId ac paramount 80 ihc Constitution WINCH We
conferred by the Constitution than nm intivduai could dt
himself VI free agency. II much treason - deny tie
powers q have. 10 exercise those we nave not.
He cnutenLc however that the stntuis tbs subject
confirmation rather thana prohibition OF the authority he
ence could exgei Bishop ana i could do t'is. Il cOud
certainly do les Parent toll child he might 20 ten
miles wuuld not the CHILD To- SAID 20 nave i affection
t5n ccarncs> understanding. II he doubt wheitef
he had authority les distance Should we, Ike chill
m the 1 adopt principle prposterDus The greater ot
course iu luIed the ls. The avs that the Bishop
y be exp, led tor improper conduct. and II had been
tended that tins language must lie understood 10 re;cf only
charges ot immortality NJ's he cuuenled-sni he appealed
10 Ihe u.ns LOgusRdithat the words " improper conduct
Yee employed express cOrtrHd,tncun tom II IN
moral conduct had gea intended such unEunse would not
nave besl used Improper not strong word
as fnprlent for the latter implied bad state, lie
rre OF the mnd WHEREIN, the former implied only that the
ouuc titus caracerzed wGs not compatible with the oic-.
He had tie fullest CONVECTION therefore, tina, the Conference
md full power 20 cpu,e suspend Bishop iUf improper
conduct to deprive han of h ecs. but not Of his 0rfe'
Il minister.
tsyn- thus concluded bs argument the Constitutional
pnwer II the Coaiera-c Sir II 'ad, That teiJte ta prwes
~ y-rci>, would become the cuy o the body u inquire
mo tie extent Of the ey to BE- feueded Was eNen>'e
md permanent feacnn: irt 81 the thu!cI ant
e:t.n. dce,ruG influence upon The whole % ONLY local and
rInsry The estns- ana motives oi the B,hJp were ike
~ To b.. dug considered II the improper conduct were tie
rt of lcuonnce or iandyeItece, however del. eI0u.
M III, he mn II effect. the sctnn OF The Conference should be
mid and Gentle possible. II the offence hnt en committed
.i,h mi knowledge the evils Il would bfng the
u,cb oen he would the Conference sly whether
Ia, uu..,fuent should be proportions severe. ~
rst h. nt the body would not deny power the
IN. T,. tHat rt.r / K'-fp Nc