Richmond daily times. [volume] (Richmond [Va.]) 1850-1853, 1851-05-24
THE DAILY TIMES.
THE METHODIST CHURCH CASE.

THE METHODIST CHURCH CASE.
| SECOND DAY.
U. S. CIRCUIT CouRr-Before judges Nelson and
Belts Henry b. Bascom and others vs. George Lane
and others. No
This important case was resumed at ten o'clock this
morning Mr. Lord continued reading extracts from
the BOOK OF Proofs, at pages 3d. g. 73 IA vs. and al
so from the Debates of the General Conference of 1874
pages 22 ~ and "a. He also read the laws of MARY.
and prohibiting the manumssion of slaves within that
state, and referred to the written opinions of judge Kew
and the Hon Mr.. Merrck, on the case OF the Rev.
FRANCIS Harding, which were presented to the Bal
tlmore Cohference which suspended that minister
The Rev. Dr. Smith, at The request OF Mr.. Lord
read the protest OF the minority OF the General Confer
ence against the action OF the majority in relation to
Bishop Andrew. "
Mr.. Lord then read letter from the late Rishon
bascom, the author OF the protest. explaining some
portions of that document which had been miscon.
strued
Mr.. Wood for the defendants asked that thew MIGHT
here be permitted 10 read the reply the protest, and
the counsel tor the complaints making no objection il
vas, with the assent OF the Court read by the Rev. DR.
We shall endeavor to make room tomorrow for
uch essential parts OF the documentary evidence intro
| cur columns -
The points upon which the complaints rely are as
/. The capital arising from the profits of the Book
ooncein was the result of the abors and SER
vices OF all the members of all tie conferences Il
was not charitable fund merely from donations 1t
was luna oil earnings. to make up the deficiency of
cGmpensau0n Tor services and to provide for those
VINO earned II, when they became incapable of labor
and Tor those who were dependent on them.
= 1t was distributed by the annual conferences but
belonged In actual right to the benefciares, and, as
such was and IS protected by the sixth restrictive rule
s. The title OF the beneiciares at the time immedi,
atey before the separation of the church into two parts
was perfect and i cannot be defeated forfeited with
out clear proof OF breach Of condition by the bene-
ficaries
4. Even if breach of condition by the annual con.
elences by whom the fund was to be distributed could
ore there has been no toreiture because the Gener
eral Conference of 1874 had the power to consent IN
an amicabe division of the conferences on grave eau
Sos t9T Ss the general efficiency ohe church
on proper ground consent such division to take eff
feet mmed iaely in the choice of the Southern Confer
ences. and without any condition.
o. The General Conference OF the Church South was
duly and properly organized according TO the pan ri
and is in every respect properly Gene
raj conference within its limits the General Conie-
| renee OF the Church North
7. The benefciares of the furd in question there
lore, who belonged to the Southern conferences did
not by the new organization lose any rights nor were
nay osquahled IN any manner from claiming their
snare OF the fund and such claim appropriately made
through the General Conference South which succeeds
to the place othe prior General Conference of the whole
8. An account should therefore. be ordered of Tho
proportions OF the profits OF the Book Concern, accord
ing to the numbers in the minutes OF 1874 and at The
Sdo Ido o Tue pIOHtS since. Also the capital of
fund should be decreed to be divided in the same
and PAID over to the commissioners South as new rus.
lees or to proper trustees to be appointed by the Court
Inc profits OF the past are to be subject distribution
according to the directions OF the general Conference
South whether the fund remain with the present trus
tees or be paid over to trustees.
1here Is such mass OF documentary evidence to be-
read IN this case that will probably occupy the great
er part OF the week. No speeches have vel been made
by The counsel on either side, except the opening adj
dress OF NY. Lord, and as there is no jury, there will
TOR oil
however continues to be crowded with spectaors-N
T. Com.
rHIRDDAY
UNITED STATES CIRCUIT CoURT.--Before Judges
Nelson snd Betts-Henry B. Bascom and others va
George Lane and others.
At the opening of the Court this morning, Mr..
which he should read from tor the defence and the ar
gument for complainant swas then commenced by by
MIR. Lord He said
There is starting point in this controyesv on which
we are all agreed, and that is that mmed lately prior
to the separation all the superannuated and worn out
preachers, their widows orphans &c. were entitled to
participate in the profits OF this book concern Ii NAV
be said that the distribution ofthese profits was under
the control OF the General Conferences but without nm
utter abandonment OF its primary duty we contend il
naa nothing to DO with them, except 10 see that they
were passed over to the annual conferences to be by
them distributed according TO the intent and purpose of
the original establishment of this fund
There was no discretion in this subject in the COME.
rences. Their duty was simply to ascertain what
persons within their limits under the class ofben.
efcares. In this court is unnecessary for us to as
certain whether the estate OF these bene6ciares is a
legal or an equitable one in the profile OF the Book
Concern.
They certainly had right to the profits, and the
agents were merely their trustees to them properly
those rights still Are they not Methodss? Have
they abandoned one jot OF doctrine dcipline? Are
they not IN communion with the Methodist Church,
The defendants say in their answer that the plaintiff
have all forfeited their rights in consequence Of seces-
sion.
II the Court order distribution of the profits it does
not follow that The fund must be divided 1t can sill
be employed IN carving this Book concern and the
profits may be divided pro rata. There need be no
technical difficulty on this po;lt
The relief asked can be afforded without disturbing
the fund in any manner whatever if the Court should
ind any difficulty in that respect Mr. Lord here cited
from numerous authorities
There is in the very of the subject light to
Guide US IN all this matter. We hnd from En,ory's
History that this fund originated with The preachers
Every preacher was an agent in the distribution of this
literature, They selected the books, and they sold
hem and it was through their labors alone that this
Book Concern reached its present ma gntude
Have not these me then some hing more than mere
right to aims at the hands of this Concern Nothing
seems to be clearer than that after providing religious
literature, the very design OF the institution was to es-
abth fund tor the support distressed preachers and
their families. That the stimulus which encouraged
them in their labors for years.
They looked forward with confidence to a provision
TOR their snpportn old age out of the funds accumulate
ed by their joint abours Spending the best portion of
their lives on poor ptance OF $500 year this fund
their only hope for themselves ia old age and their
families after death. No mere technical objection eau
be permitted IN any court OF equity forfeit the rights
of such benefciares. NV learned friends will have To
make their doctrine Of forfeiture as clear as MONDAY
before this Court will deprive the bereayed
The distressed and the taheress OF the provision which
has been so hardly earned
This fund has been created by the abors of The worm
out and superannualed preachers who now claim thar
proportion in its profits. 1t s a common property Of
earnings and only be called charity by echojcal
ty of law.
If the forfeiture is TO be according to the doctrine of
opponents not only the pre- achers who participated
in the Conference but the WIDOWS and orphans who had
share in the action of the Conference are to be de-
prved Of their support for offences in which they have