New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1851-05-30
METHODIST CHURCH CONTROVERSY
L. y. Circuit Court THURSDAY. MAY -.
Before Judges Nelson and Bets

L. y. Circuit Court. .rHURsDAy, MAY p
Before Judges Nelson and Bets
William A. Smith Ell al. agt Geo. Lane
tfaI-Mr johnson resumed on behalf OF plaintiffs
this forenoon. There was not leading man, that
IS men of eminent ability, on either side OF the line,
who whispered doubt OF the want OF constitutional
power of the General Conference Of lsii 20 adop;
and authorize the plan OF superintendent to whom
the Constitution OF this Conference was as familiar
as the Bible of their God There may have been
suggestions of the kind by certain persons and partic
ular papers of the Church afterward and previous TO
the General Conference of 1915, but not man who
doubted the power at the time and there were IN
that Convention men as eminent and as capable as
any IN the Church or out Off The resolution which
looks to "a change of the restrictive article, was the
only necessary 10 be submitted To the annual con
crences, and It so 10 the whole The division OF
the Church only depended upon the ascer;anment OF
the fact that the annual conferences IN the >ldVenold
ing States deemed It to be necessary. That General
conferences were not ignorant that the rules recon-
mandod unity but did not dream there was any prohi-
biton to create two Churches, - far as Government
was concerned, of the entire Church. The Wesleyan
body is the all the world over and IN fact conSti-
utes only one Methodist Episcopal Methodist Church.
But there are several Governments aBreeably
TO time and circumstances. Could not the Confer
cnce In 1854 have organized two Churches, one for
South and the other North The Church would but
lily serve the intention Of the original founder II eith-
or portion TO depend upon the preulccS, pollt-
cal or moral, OF another. II such "A DIVISION could
have made IA 1884, it could have boon done in
1905 which constituted the mode of conferences and
by the General Conference Of 1874, which was a con.
tlnuatOn OF the conferences as then arranged As 10
the Canadian division. u was portion oil "a" Church
SOuhC arOna, and some other portions m regard
To political Government, holds 10 the preamble, and
Is now declaring II, that each state IS AT Liberty to
separate from the other. Even suppose the Canadian
Church existed before 1t was introduced into the
chu no mi pf kNe Z t
became, 10 express II, OF the States 81 the pO
htica hierarchy and bound by all the rules that gov
erned the church My brother on the other side SAID
that the American Church could not go beyond the
United States. Does the gospel OF Christ know any
limits There may be political difficulties IN some
countries TO prevent IT, gong INTO them, but where
It is not prohibited the world Is before H. not 10
go If II pleases but obliged 10 GO The History
of Discipline 10. 25d article, note al foot,
enOins members 10 obey any government
under which they may bc-and were proper for the
Northern members, under the rule, when they go
South to obey the laws IN the places which they live.
The rule made IN reference To ministers going ~
Canada. The Canada Conference peutoned the
General Conference that they might be set OF sep.
arate government THIS shows that they did not feel
they were 1T liberty 10 go of without action on the
part OF the General Conference and that they con
sidered themselves part Of tho Conference. The
General Conference at first decided that they
had no power 10 grant separation. TINS shows
they had rot come IN as had been commended
merely IN the light Of tIcaty-the ground was
that il was unconstitutional to grant separa.
ton, because he annual Conferences have no
recommended II 10 the General Conference After.
wards they unanimously agreed TO IT. Every annual
conference comes ln BY agreement-ihcrc - no poll
teal power IN relation TO the compact The cause OF
the church demanded they should have power from
time to time to form themselves INTO as many go
yernments as circumstances might require The An
nua Conference OF 1914 had power 10 make the dyi-
sion. The Annual conference At Pittsburgh SAID the
division was brought about by the Southern mem
bers. The decision Of the church was 10 depend Mr.
cpufgp Had an 10 NJ mo
feTences Of the S!ayeholdlng states, and they 40
decided, the General Conference agreed ~ resign All
claim to the meeting houses, &c within me ilime
OF the sOuthCnC hurha share of the funds being con
nected with Il. The Northern Church Say the
Church South has 10 night to this fInd-.h0'e VI"
have the mark Of slavery on their brow ~ oou'l
ern Church have contributed TO It. gentleman q.
Maysvlle, XIV. named Armstrong who hai lAfgsN
contributed, contested the rght Of the southern
Church to the meeting hOuse on the ground ihal uis
plan OF division was nuty II was a; ~ heNo
before single Judge Ia equity, Who decided thalohe
branch should have Tie Westinghouse one ouhaal
ard the other the other Both parties appeaeu,
that the General ConyeI ton OF 1874 had fu consttu
tiOnal power 10 adopt tie plan Of DIVISION and thst
the Southern Church - entitled TO al the properly
within It's border-,hat has decided the matter South
and the decision. by tribunal which - not sur.
passed IN legal ability or character. The Canadian
Church came within taat Constitutional right. As
10 the Church. Il proceeds from the great charter Of
Him who told hs ioiO" ers 10 60 through he word
and proclaim The ld udngs Of salvation "a al. LEI
re read 10 your tOnOrs the Constitution Of the
ChuIch-the hOcs and higher Constitution Of inc
Church. gwen by God himself tO his disciples. Ina
Constitution y found N Matthew q, letn and lTA
verses, " Go INTO al nations &c. The author under
whom they act know no local distinction be wishes
all 10 be brought 10 salvation the master and the slave
be enghtec TIE master and the slave 70 DC saved;
there should Dc nothing 10 disquaiiy the teaching u
master and slave Bat men err. There dbl Dec0ne
q necessity TIE rg'ialions IN the General ara NJ
nual Conferences. and the action 70 MeSsrf.
Andrew and lar1.I-. brought about cOaglcuOn u
the minds Of The Southern members thai Inc heth-
odlst Church a. he south, to be- saved mIsl pro
coed uEde! q separate organization. Tie s@ey
Of TIC Church demanded y. As 10 the Gambia cas-
division j. go Dee made II necessary, seen ~ VI
proceedings 10 save the Church there, whore me et
lgency oxlstec-lhc doctrine Of the Church .s D's'
u order 10 save The division asked iJf ny Wv
South Wa TO save the Church there IN" neces
s'ty Of which had been shewn by the proccciings&
10 MessTs. Andrew and Harding, and TIC sel.imelh~
Of many Of The members IN the General ConleI
ence Of 1874. IN answer to the protest 81 the >otnsH
members rs 10 The action Bishop Andre W. .cb1'.
co clyIsOL OF TIC hurch absolutely mp f'ii'e, ~
order 10 save TIC GEurch AZ the South I ~ vpino.
o. the General Conference Of lcie, IN rs irthDs'
shows there was a necessity. IL was shc"a os w
accress Of the Bishops that the General t"h'iens
Of SOthOughi hat tie agtailOn had gone Il rh'ugn
but 1t show that tie agitation continnc- = a.u -
was sand created by rot only annual but 9ii.ep
Conforcnccs. ard individuals created u.inc my
Tie proceedings II regard to Nj iHrHx ~
MARYLAND. hid rs ongln from the agitation be'ts,
in the ChuTJ J. ard out Of It. ProceedinPS LII
AWAY with irn.an tOhdaPe began a, the Soulli
and the doors Hcie thrown WIDE open 20 '"'AH