Weekly national intelligencer. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1841-1869, 1852-12-18
THE METHODIST CHURCH SUIT IN NEW YORK

1t will be remembered that this case was argued in the
United States Circuit Court for the Southern District
New York. at the May term 1851 before Judges NELSON
and Belts and that in November following Judge MEL
pronounced decision in favor of the compainants
who sued behalf of themselves aud Of their associate
benefcares connected with the Methodist Episcopal
Church South for pro rata portion Of the property Of
the Methodist Book Concern in the city OF New York In
pursuance of the of the decree reference was had
before the clerk of the ascertain and report upon
the value Of the property, and upon other matters in
yolyed in the questions hereafter mentioned The com
mssioners for the South with their counsel were
at the reference in April last and the book agents also
appeared with counsel Considerable testimony
the reference, and the whole matter argued in
May before the referee who reported thereon As the
questions wherein the counsel differed he decided
rally for the defendants the North The compainants
being dissatisfied with the report took exceptions il
in consequence of which the matter brought before
the court and in October last il again argued by
Daniel Lord for the companants and by f. L. Faneher
for the defendants,
We now learn that the Judges (NELsoS and Belts J
having deberated upon the case, divided in opinion
upon the principal questions arising the exceptions
the report and they have, consequently, ordered the
points which they differ be sent up the Supreme
Court of the United States for decision by that tribunal
We understand that final decree be entered in
the until the direction Of the Supreme Court upon
the points certified 10 it shall be back TO the Circuit
peal from the decree Of November, 1851 deciding the
main question Of the right of the South take such appeal
until the final decree in the is entered
II contended for the South the argument of the
exceptions to the clerks report that the Southern bene
caries entitled to be paid their portion Of div
dend according to the profits yearly reported by the
book agents to the Annual Conference that the share
the South in the capital be ascerained according
70 the value Of the in 1S45 and that such share
should be paid in cash. with certain additions Of interest
Also that the ratio should be computed according to the
numbers Of preachers reported in the minutes for the
lS45 On the other hand il contended for the de-
PENDANTS that the share Of the Southern benecares in
the profits should be rated according what the Northern
benefcares had actually received and not according
reported actual profits that the portion Of capital
be asceraned for the South should be taken according
the value Of 1851 and not Of 1886 aud that whatever
the share il should not be paid in cash. but that the
capital must be poroned under the decree Of the Court
by apporonment Of the specific effects be agreed
upon and If such agreement could not be made then
that there must be sale ordered and distribution Of
the proceeds also that the ratios were to be regulated
according the number Of preachers named in the min
utes Of 1874 and not Of lS45.
We understand that the differences Of opinion between
the Judges fundamental upon the principal points
mentioned and il is therefore inevitable that the case
far those points concerned should 20 the Su-
preme Court Of the United States--N T. Com Adr.