New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1852-12-16
The Methodist Church Suit in New-York.

It will be remembered that this ease Was ar
ed in the United States Circuit Court for the Southern
district OF this City, at the May term lsOl,
before judge Melon end Bets and that IN November
following Judge Nelson pronounced decision In favor
Of the complanants who sued ON behalf o themselves
and Of their associate benehcaries connected win he
NJ T. Church South. for a pro raa portion OF tne
properly OF the Methodist Book Concern IN inc
City of New-York In pursuance OF the terms OF
the decree, q reference was nad before tne NleiA
of the Court 70 ascertain and report upon tne Saue
OF the property and upon other matters Involved
in the questions hereinafter mentioned Inc Cour
mis-oners for the South, with tneir counsel were
present the reference IN Aprl last ana me BOOK
Agents also appeared with counsel Conslderaole ts
nopy YVES taken Ne reference and the whole inter
was argued in May, before the referee VINO reported
thereon As 10 the question wherein tue cOunsel dSre
he decided generally for the deienients, One Sorth)
The conplainsnts being dissatisfied with the report
took exceptions 20 r. in consequence OF which the mat
ter WAS brought before the Court and IN Octe5er last
il was again argued by Daniel Lord Tor the compiln
tpts and by T. T. Fancher for the defendanns
We now Learn that the judges Nelson AMI Betts naV
Ing delaeraed upon the case, are divided IN opinion
upon tic principal questions arising on the exceptions
10 the repor and they have consequently ordered rns
ponts on which they der to be sent up the Supreme
Court OF the United States for decision by thar tribunal
We understand that final decree cannot BE- entered IN
the un- the direction CT the Supreme Coa, upon
the points certified 70 Il shall be sent back 10 te Circuit
Court Nor can the de ndans should they elect u APP
pesl from the decree of Novefnber l-5l, deciding the
main question the rht OF the South take s1cn sppe
until the III al decree II llr NdN-c e c-syANN
II was contended for the south, on the argument Ot
the executions 10 tire Clerks Report thai the SouLaern
bensfcisros were entitled % be pad tner portion OF
Dividends according the profits az yearly reported oy
the book agents 70 the annual Conference that toe snare
of the south the csp was 20 be ascertained accord
ing 10 the value Of the n le0 and taat su snare
should be paid in cash wrh certain addions Of interest
also TIA, the rso should be computed according 70 tae
numbers Of preachers reported in the minutes Tor tne
yesr las On the other hand was contended for ths
depdsn,. that the share OF the Southern oenecares
in The prods should be rated according 70 waa. the
Northern benefcaries had actually received and noe &C
cordpz TO reported seus profits that the portion OF
capitol 70 be ascerained for the SOUTH should De aHen
according 10 the value Of 1851 and not Of -io and taa
whsteyer the share was should not be Pad IA eash
but TIM, the capital must be porr1oned under .e
Of the Court BY an superintendent OF the .peeinc eao
70 be Areed upon and such Agreement so-.i AZ. %
made then that there mutt be sale orncrei All au
uburiop of the proceeds so that the raos were 70 se
regulated according the number o. preachers nAsn
IN the minutes Of ls44, and not OF lso
We nderstxnd risf the differences Of opinion between
the Judges are fundamental upon the principal points
sentioed and H. therefore, inevitable thsf the ease
40 far n these points concerned should 90 10 tae 81
preue ccurt OF the United st1ses. tcommrcia Adv