The republic. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1849-1853, 1851-05-22

SECOND DAY.

SECOND DAY.
UNIrsD STATES CiRculr CoURr. Before Judges
Nelson and Bette. Hsnyy B. Bascom and others We.
George Lane and ofheys.
This important case was resumed at ten O'Clock
this morning. Mr.. Lord continued reading extracts
from the Book of Proofs, at pages "a, %, 49, IA, rs,
and also from the Debates Of the General Confer
ence OF 1874, pages %, % and "a. He also read
the lava OF Maryland prohibiting the manumis-
son Of slaves within that State and referred to the
written opinions OF Judge Key and the Hon. MIR.
Merrick, on the case Of the Rev. Francis A. Hard
ing, which were presented to the Baltimore Con
ference, which suspended that minister.
The Rev. DR.. Smith, at the request of Mr. Lord,
read the protest Of the minority Of the general
ference against the action Of the majority in rcla
ton to Bishop Andrew.
Mr.. Lord then read letter from the late Bishop
Bascom, the author of the protest. explaining some
portions OF that document which had been miscon-
strued.
Mr.. Wood, for the defendants, asked that they
might here be permitted to read the reply TO the
protest, and the counsel for the complainants
making objection, was, with the assent of the
court, read by the Rev. DIR. Peck.
The points upon which the compainants rely
L. The capital arising from the profits of the
Book Concern was the result of the common labors
and servicesofal the members Of all the ferences
TWAS not a charitable fund merely from donations
1t was a fund OF earnings, to make up the def
cheney OF compensation for services rendered, and
to provide for those who earned it when they be-
dependent on them
2. twas distributed by the annual conferences,
but belonged in actual right to the beneficiaries
and, as such, was and is protected by the sixth re-
strictive rule.
B. The title Of the bcneficiaries at the time i'm.
mcdiatcly before the separation of the church into
two parts was perfect, and it cannot be defeated or
forfeited without clear proof OF breach OF cond-
ton by tho bene6ciarics.
4. Even If breach of condition by the annual
conferences BY whom the fund was to be distributed
could forfeit, there has been forfeiturc because
the general conference OF 1914 had the power to
consent TO an,icabe division OF tho conferences
on grave causes touching the general efficiency of
the church.
g. The general conference of 1874 did in fact and
on proper ground consent to such division to take
effect Immediately, in the choice of the southern
conferences, and without any condition.
3. The general conference of the Church South
plan of separation, and is IN every respect as prop
erly general conference within its limits as the
general conference of the Church North.
Z. The beneficiaries of the fund in question,
therefore, who belonged to the southern confer
cnces, did not by the new organization lose any
rights, nor were they disqualified in any manner
from claiming their share of the fund and such
claim is appropriately made, through the general
conference South, which succeeds to the place of
the prior general conference of the whole church.
8. An account should, therefore, be ordered of
the proportions of the profits of the Book Concern
according to the numbers in the minutes of 1874
and at the same ratio of the profits since. Also
the capital of the fund should be decreed to be di
vided In the same way, and paid over to the COM
missioners South, trustees or to proper trus
tees to be appointed by the court The profits Of the
past are to be subject to distribution according
the directions Of the general conference South,
whether the fund remain with the present trustees
or be paid over to now trustees.
There 10 such mass of documentary evidence
TO be read in this that it will probably occupy
the greater part Of the week, No speeches have
yet been made by the counsel on either SIDE except
the opening address by Mr.. Lord, and, as there ia
no jury, there will be very little for eloquence
The court room, however, continues to be crowded
with spectators.