Hannibal journal and western union. (Hannibal, Mo.) 1851-1852, 1851-11-27
rethodist Book Concern Case.
The following is an abstract of The decision IN
he Methodist Book Concern Case:

the Methodist Book concern Oase'
The Judge reviewed the various points OF the
c,so deferred TO the fact that The Methodist
obureh was organized in the United States IN
1854 nnder the superintendence and sovereign
M Of the travelling preachers, who, in general
conference. were the whole power of the church,
tbe Law members then and now having ne voice
in church government.
Before This the Methodist church was con-
Quoted by John Wesley and his agents, and the
change was made by his assent and wish. The
church was never incorporated, bun held together
and kept organized by certain printed rules.
The plaintiffs say that the differences between
the Northern and Southern branches OF the
church sprung up previously to 1874, as 10 the
ownership of slaves. This breach Threatened
10 impair the safety of tho church. The quess--
ton arose In 1874, whether or not there should
be separation, and resolutions were passed by
a large majority Of the conference OF that year,
,held in New York, deciding that should the an
nual conference in the slaveholding states con-
slider it best to separate, they might do SO.
All ne Southern annual conferences were in
that event to be organized in separate church
to be called "ihe Methodist Church South" 1t
was also decided that travelling ministers might
attach themselves to either the Northern or
Southerachurch.
The plaintiffs alieJga ,il5@:'c4ie conference bad
this power, and this was confirmed in lS45 by
council Of the Northern Bishops.
=, The church, the plaintiffs then say, became
divided into two distinct bodies, Northern and
Southern, and that the South was entitled TO its
share of the property belonging TO the body.
The church owned large amount of property,
among which was the New York Methodist
Book Concern, worth $3.50, 600; but the agents
of this concern, as well the principals, refused
to allow any division:
The plaintiffs further say that part of, them
are travelling ministers, and that they and 300
other travelling ministers have an interest in this
fuHd--tiat TIE church has about 460,00 mem
bers South, and that there are about $4,000
North.
The defendants (Messrs Peck, Bangs and
others agents of the Book ConcerH) acknowl-
edged the adoption Of the resolutions, but state
that they were intended to meet contingency
which never occurred, and that the plan OF sep
aratlon was illegal, because unconstitutional, and
further that the South in withdrawing, did so
voluntarily. and thereby renowned all their
privileges, as owners of the Book Concern.
They acknowledge that the Book concern was
established by. travelling preachers, and that it
is to be applied to the relief of their orphans,
and also tothe relief of superannuated preachers.
The court stated that the travelling preachers
claim their share of the fund now, as before the
separation. The establishment has produced
large profits, had been conducted with great
Judgment, but owed its prosperity mainly TO
the efforts of the travelling preachers. The
fund was originally intended for their benefit,
and if attempted to be changed, it was the prov
ince of this court to prevent it.
The Court also considered that the Trustees
Of the Book Concern stood in the light of the
Benefciaries Of the Charitable Fund, which had
been endowed by third parties. According to
the decision Of the original founders. the pro-
ceeds and profits had been devoted TO their use
and if they came within the regulations they
were still entitled to such proceeds and profits
The Court desired to administer the law in
behalf Of the claimants, their case exciting pc
culiar sympathy. The plan Of. separation in
1874 provided that there should be pro rata
distribution, and that each should have their
share. 1t bore the impress of good viii and
good feeling, and was founded, so far as the
Court knew, on strictly equitable principles
1t was adopted by vote of LAT to 22'in a body
where more than 1000 preachers ere repre-
sented
As to the powers of the General Conference
the court considered That they were as they
were originally, andthat they were not affected by
being delegated 10 representative principle, be-
ing necessary incident to the growth Of the
country They originally had the power to
make as many distinct organizations as they
pleased. The conference had the same power
IN 1874 as in 1884, when the whole body acted
. for itself.
The members were free. TO say the best poll
cy OF accomplishing the great design of the
Master in whose service they were engaged.
the object being the spread of The Gospel. Thc,
court also thought that the idea that the Church
mad but limited and prescribed powers was err
roneous. The Canada Conference was oripi-
nally part OF the American Methodist Church
but IN 1923 was allowed TO separate. The Tex
as conference was also brought into the Ameri-
can church, and In both cases by the act of the
General Conference.
The Court considered that the claimants had
me Same right as previously to the separation
'laI the claimants were still TRAVELLING
preachers, and their field of labor within
,nel[ original jurisdiction. Assuming that
inc General Conference was not authorized TO
make llle DIVISION, shll the claimants were NOT
deprived OF their rights to share in the fund,
not having forfeited it; it was not in law in fbe
them. ~ '"N0 II II oiu
The Court sononcludcd, but whether p,o rata
or proportion to the capital is left for future adj
!, me Court also earnestly hoped that the diff
culty might now he amicably settled br tbe
parties interested. If the conclusions arrived
az should restore harmony in the Church, it
prrp h., L
pended upon the case. '''~'' '"' '''i' OK
~ correspondence of the N. Y. Herald
urdh0 M0peRlRnt of The Rnn.nh,lr,O.o IL ,