Wilmington journal. [volume] (Wilmington, N.C.) 1844-1895, 1857-12-18

Hon. JOHN c. BREcKINRrDGE President of the United
States and President of the Senate.
From the Godsboro' Tribune.
NORTH CAROLINA CONFERENCE.
| The North Carolina Conference commenced its SEES
sion in this town. last "Wednesday morning, Bishop
Pearce presiding, Rev. f. Iel Secretary and Rev. w.
j. Lewis assistant Secretary. We only glance at
! the proceedings.
The following standing committees were appointed
| Public UOrAip-Wyche Long, Frost and G. p.
Jones.
Books aud Accounts-Bu and Weaver
| Observation-Disclosures Bibb and Chafin.
MemOirs.-N +. Reid and Hudson.
Ed,scatlon-Deems, Tucker, Burton, Carson n F.
Reid G. p. Jones and Frost.
Sabbath Sctools-Carraway and Z. w. Moore
Bible Cause.-Langdon and w. H. Bobbitt
Tract CatSe-Iillett and Andrews.
NecessitOus Cdses.-Doub and Jordan
Pastoral Address.-Heflin, Burton and Floyd.
The accounts from the publishing House and Tract
Society were referred to the appropriate committees
| The Rev. Messrs. Craven, Moore, Arnold and Bur-
ton local preachers were admitted on trial in the tray
cling connection. Also Rev. Messrs Gates Alfred and
Moran local Elders the latter Of Gennessee Conference
were admitted into the travelling connection.
| Rev. A. w. Mangum, w. G. Cannon, G. w. Hep
tinstal j. f. Smith, r. G. Barrett Samuel Robertson
and A. d. Belts passed examination of character and
were continued on probation.
The following elected to deacons orders and adj
mitted into full connection
| L. l.. w.
Wheeler NJ. j. Hunt, J. B. Bobbitt w. H. Hight,
NJ. +. Thomas, J. l.. Newby j. \. Carraway, J. G.
Thomas and w. d. Machen.
Thursday Dec. 5rd
A complaint of maladministratiOn was presented
through DR.. Hooper by the Quarterly Conference of
ruled out the evidence of two witnesses at certain trial
at l1ilsbOro, on thegrOund that they interested
The Bishop sustained Mr.. Burton.
The Rev. VIM. Gloss then filed bill of complaint
against the gentleman--the Rev Robt. O. Burton
as follows
charge Rev. RObt O. Burton with Ma-adminis-
taton i'll conducting investigation of charges against
Rev. P. w. Archer, at Henderson in March last.
Specification lst-In having refused to investigate
charge lst in the bill of charges against Rev. F. w.
Archer, which bill resolution of the n. C. Conference
referred to him for investigation.
Specification 2nd-1n having admitted euparte testi-
mony after having given me assurance that erp0rte
testimony would be admitted.
Specification 3d-In having suppressed testimony by
ruling that witness for the defence, viz Rev. j. P
Moore, not bound to questions when cross
examined by myself of which ruling said witness avail
ed himself, and refused to answer.
Specification 4th-In allowing witness for the de-
fence, Rev J. F. Moore to change his testimony after
had been read and approved by himself and pending the
discussion, and after had used said testimony to show
it proved the guilt Of the accused.
Specialization 5th-That after the testimony had beer
closed and arguments submitted both sides he intro
duced new witness in behalf of the accused
Specification 6h-Ihat after the parties had retired
he remained with the committee and took part in then
deliberations in making up their decision.
Mr., Burton entered infinitely, in his opening speech
into an investigation of these charges.
The first specification, he submitted could not be en-
teraned for its ndeniteneSs and wished to know wheth
er the Bishop would entertain but the Bishop decin
ed to make any discsion for the present.
TO the second specification he replied afrmativelv-h
had admitted etpotte testimony after having been alyis
To n hNr rtajO Ubo, L.,
not now at command. This erp01te testimony it ap
pears was certificate from certain gentlemen at Pitts
boro derogatory to the piey Of Rev W. Gloss the read
ing of which was allowed by Mr.. Burton.
Specification third, Mr. Burton, alleged, contained
false charge-if it means to charge that the witness
therein named Rev. j. F. Moore, did not answer an
questions when cross-eXamined He, Burton had rdec
that Mr. Moore not bound to answer one question
by which, if answered. he would dvulge confidential
conversation communicated to him the counsellor AM
friend of Mr.. Archer.
Specification fourth, also false-ncorrect Th
testimony, (at Archers traD was closed and while MI
/ Gloss was commenting on it, Mr.. Blake, one of tn
Committee suggested that he Mr. Gloss, had msunder
stood of the witnesses WheeupOn said witness Rev
j. p. Moore was called on and allowed to explain hi
own language which he did by requesting that certain
words therein, should be placed in quotation marks
which was done without addition alteration erasure
Specification fifth, Mr.. Burton admitted that a wit
ness had been introduced after the testimony had beer
closed and argument submitted. But it was done on
on the Affirmation Of the accused who had just thei
learned that Dr. Morgan Gloss one of the witnesses
had suppressed part OF certain statement made to hin
f by Rev. r. H. Hefln and equally injurious to sal
Hefin, to the afiant and to Geo. May of Pittsboro
one of the gentlemen who had signed the certi6cat
: derogatory to the piety of Rev w. Gloss That he
Mr.. Morgan Gloss had testified in the trial that Nh
d Helm told him (ClosS) that MIR. Geo. Nav was tn
l. keeper of grog shop and Billiard table, whereas MI
i Heflin had told him (Closs that when he GIeainl LEI
PittsbOro, some year two before said Nav was I'll
If keeper of grogShop and Billiard table, and that
n regretted 50 worthy man should engage in such
is business, and further that he regarded said Nav as
man of veracity On this affirmation of the accused h
n Mr. Burton did admit the testimony of new witnes
not more IN behalf Of the accused however than in b
half OF the character Of May and in Justice to Rev.
l. L. Helm. If the witness Gloss had suppressed tina
part OF MI Helms statement that was necessary TO
full elimination of the TRUTH he deemed it due to all II
parties concerned-to Mr. Helm, Mr. Nav Mr. Arcl
, er and even to the Rev. NJ Gloss that it should
!, known. For these reasons he had admitted n NO
v witness, after the testimony had been closed and AFRO,
Is ment submitted and lie submitted it now to the Cor
! ference to decide whether he was right or wrong
Specification sixth, Mr.. Burton admitted that he ba
renamed with the Committee during their eliberation
s. but denied positively that he had attempted to hi;
E their decision This charge he said involved the con
~ mittee as well as himself, Of which opinion was IL
e Blshop Also Mr. Gloss having disavowed all intention
TO duplicate the committee the Bishop entertained IL
charge and Mr. Burton called on Mr. She'll one of IL
lie committee by whom he proved that so far from a
Of tempting to influence their decision he had heonept
told them he wished each member to make up his ov
opinion according to his own Judgment on the testim
IF ny submitted to their consideration