The daily exchange. [volume] (Baltimore, Md.) 1858-1861, 1860-03-26
PRICE TWO CENTS.
THE LAY DELEGATION QUESTION IN THE
METHODIST EPISCOPAL CHURCH.

4he question oil admitting lay delegates into the
conferences of the Methodist Episcopal Church, is
beginning to attract much attention among the
membership of that denomination of Christians
At the last session of the East Genesee Conference
series of resolutions were adopted urging upon
the general Conference the subject of Lay Repre-
sentation. These resolutions were sent to the sew
eral conferences of the Church for action. The
Baltimore Conference, recently in session, refused
to concur in them
In the Philadelphia Conference the resolutions
were made the order of the day for Friday last,
and when the subject was called up Dr. T. j.
Qulgley moved that the Conference concur in the
resolutions
DR.. Anderson took the floor to advocate the res.
olutOns from East Genesee. Speaking of his own
experience, he maintained that the aymen were
capable of governing the Church in conjunction
with the clergy. He thought the laity would never
give up their claim to their part in the government
of the Church. Even now we have "lobby' in
fluence which might much better be controlled by
the law of the Church.
Rev L. Reed took the other side He gave a
sketch of various agitations in the Church. He
maintained that the agtatOrs had always gone out
of the Church, and left the denomination in great
peace For one hundred and twenty years the
Methodist Episcopal Church had done without Law
epresentation-seventy-six years in this country
and we had better let we'll enough alone. Voices
"Amen!'l We have had various changes in our
alterations
great that the hymn-book seems on wheels, and we
know not where it will stop. Laughter. The
old ship ofMethOdism has carried so many to glory
that we want to be let alone. We do not want the
passengers to take command. The fifth wheel of
the wagon is of no IRenewed laughter Do
not change the rules If you do, the Young men
may shout, but the old will weep as they did on a
certain occasion at Jerusalem, when you could not
tell the difference between the weeping and the
shouting.
Rev. T, J. Quigley next rose to advocate lay re-
presentation maintaining that this reform would
be foundation reared beside the old foundation to
keep it sure and steady. From the basis of repre-
sentation at the General Conference of 1856 the
speaker claimed that the laity not represented
in just and equitable manner. The Church has
suffered in the past from the want of this very
thing; if we had had this just and equitable repre-
sentation in 1884, it would have prevented that dis
astrous schism which then occurred. Nor is it
contrary to the Scriptures while it is undoubtedly
demanded by expectancy. Again, he asked
whether the laty is to be at the mercy of a major
ity of the General Conference, and that Confer
ence by no means justly and equitaby representing
them2
Rev. w. L. Gray followed on the other side He
was opposed to concurrence in the Genesee resolu-
tions. He had yet to learn that the advocates of
lay representation had yet presented some tangible
practical plan by which the machinery of Method
ism can be carried out successfully. He thought
the ministry should not surrender their sacred
rights to those who not bound by the same
vows to devote their all to the service of religion.
He thought, too that we had no guarantee that
agitation about slavery in the Church would be
more prudently conducted by laymen, while it con
tlnued, as now, In politics.
DR.. Durbin began by showing by his past votes
that his views were based, not on any temporary
objection, but were the result of conviction. He
went on to show that reforms like the present
not the result of agitation and recrmination, but
were the fruit of calm discussion. 1t was his dec-
| ded opinion, from wide comparison Of views
which he had had with clergy and laity, that this
| 1or
time and progress. 1t was the duty of the church
to be that she does not go too fast thatshe full
| fills the correct conditions of progress. For his
| part, he thought the time had come for this so
| important measure. Again it should not be re-
| quired that we should lay down every detail of
| plan for lay representation now, while we are ad-
vocating the principle. We leave the details to
| the wisdom of the General Conference The speak
| er shared in the impression that there was con-
servative force in the opinions of the intelligent
laity which will be of great service to the Church
Besides, were the laity represented in the confer
enGes, the laws passed by joint concurrence ofboth
| orders IN the Church-and so representing the en-
tire Church-would have greater weight and au-
| thority.
DR.. Hodgdon rose to reply to DR.. Durbin He
urged the indetiniteness of the proposed reform,
| and maintained that the resolutions were trap
Were they adopted and carried up to General Con.
ference, this conference would be held responsible
for something very different from what brethren
! meant when they voted for them. He thought
tnat the clergy asked no prerOgatlVeS which did
not bring with them corresponding responsibilities
| These prerogatives the clergy were accountable
| for to the Head of the Church, and they-nOt the
laity-would be so held accountable. He was sick
| OF this matter. If the clergy were not competent
for the duties to which we are set apart we should
hide our heads in very shame. | am proud of our
| laymen, and all their wisdom is wanted by the
Church. Our denomination is now ha If a century
in advance of the other denominations in this very
matter OF church government Change is not pro-
| gress necessarily. The speaker proceeded at
length, with much ingenuity, striking various
| changes on this tune.
Rev. Mr.. Bishop wished DR.. Hodgdon to reco asid
er his statement that these resolutions were ga
trick"
Prof. johnson suggested that this discussion be
postponed till 10 A. NJ. on Monday, when the laitv
might be heard from. He made motion to that
effect, but subsequently withdrew it.
| Calls were heard for vote concurring with
| the East Genesee resolutions.
DR.. Carter made a speech in favor Of giving the
entire finances of the Church into the hands of the
laity.
! Rev. p. Coombe then said ne should be obliged
| to vote to non-concur, no matter what he might
think of the propriety of the consideration OF
the subject of lay representation by the General
Conference. This question must come down to the
| Annual Conferences some time or other.
The Secretary then read the resolutions.
After some discussion DR.. Durbin moved to lay
the resolutions on the table, to make way for re
solution offered by him to the effect that the Con
ference request the Gener al Conference to take into
consideration the propriety and practicabity o
lay representation.
Some points of order were raised, after which
DR.. Durbin withdrew his motion.
The vote, by count, was then taken on concur
ring in the East Genesee resolutions and resulted
thus:
10 concur. '.'..''.''..'.'....... 4S
So the motion was lost
DR.. Durbin then re-introduced his resolution
somewhat amended, so as to read, that should th
resentaton, it be upon such basis of representation
as the General Conference in their wisdom thnl
proper.
A count-vote was taken on DR.. Durbin's resolu
ton, which resulted thus:
For the resolution .........................S6
Against the resolution. n.......................S9
so the resolution was lost.
Mr.. Qugey then offered a resolution confnin
the request to the General Conference to the intro
duction of lay represent tation into the General Cor
ference. Lost, and the Conference shortly after &C
iourned.
, In Philadelphia, on Thursday night conventio
, of lay members of the NJ. E. Church was held 70
the purpose of considering the subject of lay re
representation in the conferences of the Church
vote was taken to test the sentiments of tn
meeting, at which there representative
from a number of city churches, when it was foun
that large majority favorable to the measure
Another meeting is to be held tomorrow evenn;
on Lne SUBJECT, WITH view to OBTAIN more gene
raj expression of sentiment.
TERRIBLE MUTINY OF COOLIES AT SEA.-We re
ceived a telegram from Boston Saturday, ar
nouncing very serious case of mutiny on boar
the ship Norway, (of New York. Captain Major
on her recent passage from Macao to Havana
which came very proving disastrously to th
officers, passengers and crew. The Adrerti8er c
Saturday furnishes the following particulars
The Norway sailed from Macao November 26th
with about thousand coolies board, an
when five days out, at about six O'Clock in tn
evening, the captain being below at the time,
mntiny broke out among the coolies who set fir
to the ship in two places, and endeavored to fore
the matches. Mr.. Simpson, of Boston, one of tn
mates, had charge of the deck, and the watch will
the exception of the man at the Wheel was alof
taking in sail; Mr.. Simpson rushed to the hate
and commenced the struggle. The crew from alof
and those below tried to seize the boats and eav
drew his pistol and threatened to shoot the frs
man who dared to make that attempt.
The crew then rallied and went to the assstanc,
of the officers, and fight ensued, which continued
from six in the evening until after daylight tn
next morning. Thirty of the coolies were killed
and more than ninety wounded, before tn
mutiny was quelled. The Captain then gave tn
coolies one hour to deliver up the arms in the
possession; if they did not, he threatened to Gu
away the masts, set fire to the ship, take the boat
and provisions and leave them to their fate. Tht
mutineers soon came to terms.
Capt. Major had his wife and two daughters witt
him. and also lady passenger and child, but du
ring the night the lady died of fright, and in the