Richmond daily Whig. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1842-1861, 1854-05-13


1905. IN that year The Consullon Of hi, body va,
changed 90 a. to DO composed thereafter by travelling
preachers to DO elected by the Annual In tho
ratio OF one Tor every nve members This has been altered
from time time. that In lslI the representation WAS
one foe every twenty ono members At the time Of this
change aud as part Of IL certain limitations were imposed
upon the powers OF this General Conference called the
six restrictive artccs 1. That they should not alter or
change the articles Of religion establish any new
ard Of doctrine 3. Nor allow OF moro than ono repro
sentative for every fourteen members OF tho Annual
ercnces lees than one for every thirty s. Nor alter
the government as TO do away with Epscopscy or de-
stroy the plan Of itinerant OBSERVATION-DISCLOSURES Nor
change tho rulesof the United Societies g. Nor dcorivs
the ministers preachers by trial by Committed and az
appeal members before tho Society or Law Commute
tee aud appeal Aud 0. Nor appropriate the proceed, of
the Book Concern tho charter fund to any purpos,
other than Tor the benefit OF the travelling supernumerar
superanustcd and worn out preachers their wives widows
aud children to these restrictions the
Conference possessed the powers as when
of the entire body Of preachers. Aud It will be seen
that these relate only to the doctrine of tho church
its representation Ia tho General Conference the
Episcopacy, discipline Of It's preachers and members
the Book Concern. and charer fund. In all other re-
spect and in every thing else that concerns tho welfare
of the Church. tho General Conference represents the
sovereign power the before. This is the view
taken by the General Conference ITSELF exempdcd by
the and practice OF that BODY 10 1890 they set Off
to the British Conference Of Wesleyan Aethodists tho
several circuits and societies in Lower Canada Aud In
1928 they separated tho Annual Conference OF Upper
Canada from their jurisdiction aud erected the same Into
distinct and Independent Church. These instances
together with the present division In 1884, furnish evil
denec OF the opinions Of the eminent aud ed
men Of this Church in these several Conferences OF the
power claimed which, IL the question othcrwise doubt
ul, should be regarded decisive in favor Oft We
will add, that all the Northern bishops fve in number
In council In July 1915 acting under the plan of scpars
top regarded rs OF binding obligation aud coniormed
their action accordingly.
has also been urged the part Of the defendants
that the division OF tho Church. according the plan OF
the separation, was made to depend not only upon the
lhA ANN
also the Of the Aupual Conferences North
as well as South to change OF the sixth restrictive arti
Gle and as this refused the division which took place
was unauthorized. But this Is q misrepresentation
The change OF this article made condition Of the
division. Th, depended alone upon the division Of the
Southern Conferences.
The division the Methodist Episcopal
p,ss In Of The proper aa.hor,y carried with
the and p5Spsry ~ oOnsns
Ia this Book coneern--hh belonged nr eaehers
Concern anueh asocia,ion was
snS GSy S who were themselves
u hs, been .ESsd so"evsr that assSrans the plan
depend upon to The
the church The Ss ss
oiheTS' This stipulation controls and
We do no. understand the plan of admit. the
OF asspsraton and provide. among the
GpG a and r but ssaps
General Conference as respected divOn property in
Ha,IOn OUT Condition t To- s r Si Of
OF the
order enable the General complete the part
tion Of the property
We will simpy add that division OF common proper,y
followed matter OF law advisor OF the
notng snort OF an agreement stipulation
to give their share OF it, could preclude assertion OF Their
shG and u Is quite clear such 10
be und In the plan Of separation The contrary mani
fes. from perusal OF IL.
without pushing the ease further, conclusion that the
aud those they their .hs
property In this Book Concern And proper decree will
be entered TO carry this decision into effect. "
The co:npainsnis the tb
division OF the Church south but also the General
the Annual Conferences OF the The share therefore, of
th BSoE concern belonging to the beneaesre Church.
and which its authorities entitled
charge o. for their benefit properly paid oysr To
planants, as the authorised agents for This purpose
We'ha accordingly direct decree 20 be the
decree g. the Court below" and remandng the proceedings
against the DEFENDANTS and reference the case 20 mn.tsI
take an acsn OF the property belonging Concern
and report to the Court It's cash value and ror
ton belonging To the which
whole OF the fund.- the that the tray-Ine
preachers In the Chvch North the division said
Chae And and on the coming la Of the report and
ton OF the decree shall be favor Of the con-
plananis 70. that amount. " ~
wM. THOMAS CARROLL C. ems