The Middlebury register. [volume] (Middlebury, Vt.) 1850-1882, 1851-11-19
Decision in the Great Methodist Case,

L. 5. CIRCUIT CouRT Before judges
Nelson and Belts. ii. Is Bascom and others
vs.. Geo. Lane and olhers The opinion of
the court III this case was delivered this
morning by Judge Nelson, and We may now
expect that tie controversy between The
Methodist Episcopal Church and the Meth,
odis Episcopal Church, south, in relation TO
the division OF property will he definitely
settled. The case WIS argued several months
ago bv George Wood and Rufus Choate for
the defendants, and Daniel Lord and Rever-
dy johnson for The complainanis. The oIn
ion Of the Court is vcluminons, and occupied
an hour and half in lis delivery.
The first point considered is the power of
the general conference 10 authorize n sepa>
ration, and this the Couri hold 10 have been
clcarl, shown. Independent of property"
they say, the power Of severance is wri,tcn
upon every page Of ihrir proceedings"
They then advert to the plan Of separation
in 1919, b, which the only condition upon
which permanent separate organization
was made 10 depend was the voluntary action
Of the annual conferences in the slavehod>
ing states. These conferences determined
upon the separation, and DpS0 tdcto il be-
came complete. IL was stipulated in the
plan OF severance thar ministers miuht attach
themselves wiihom blame to either branch of
the church, and the local property within the
limits of each branch was nut to be claimed
by the other. The general property, such
as notes. the Book Concern, &C., was re-
served for disposal upon equitable priaciplcs
AFTER further consideration, il being consid.
cred essential before this part of the division
could be accomplished, that two third. of all
tie annual conferences, North and South
should consent 10 the repeal of the sixth re-
si'ic'ive article Of the Church. This article
not having been 81 repealed. The Court held
that II there was no other consideration in
the case, the NJ. + Church, South, mirht
not perhaps be entitled TO a share OF the
| property
But. the rights of the Church, South, rest
upon established principles of law and equ-
| iy, which make II the duty of Court Of
Chancery 10 Interfere and see that the fund
is properly distributed, especially as il is by
M means certain that the d, lribuiion claim.
cd would he even in coniravention of the
Sixth restrictive article. " hat have the
travelling preachers of the South done 10
deprive themselves oftheir rights in the fund?
1t was agreed on all hands that TWO distinct
1 ecc leSlaslical organizations though identiral>
~ the same IN faith and discipline, were
necessary for the promotion OF their holy
mission to spread gospel holiness tn, ough
these lands" and by the plan OF separation.
ministers were permitted TO attach themsel,c s
10 either without blame. The comuIainants
are not only within the description, but are
among he very persons designed by the
spirll II not 10y The letter OF the article.
Upon the whole, our conclusion is that
the complainan's are entitled 10 their share Of
the produce Of the Book Concern: aud a
decree will lac ordered accordingly. Wheth-
er lne fund shall he administered by an an.
pllca'ion oil the produce pro rata or by an
apporionmeni OF The capital are qurs ions
reserved until the settlement of the decree. "
The decision concludes by expressing the
hope that an arrangement may yet be effect.
Cd in spirit OF harmony and Christian feel.
ing, without the legal enforcement. of the de.
cree."-N. Y. Com. Adc.
The sum in dispute in the great Meth.
odst Episcopal Church case, was $3.50, 900
being the amount at which the Book con-
Germ is estimated.