The central Presbyterian. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1856-1908, 1861-12-28
GENERAL ASSEMBLY.
F0rRTH Day.

1fiScASSt0N aF0H me NfpON ~ nc co0fn ~ tSt-
s7s C8smiHee II nc Board ef Domeste
Mr. Webb thjnE that this report re-
Qpires some more special action on the part
Of tha- Assembly, and move that part Of
the report which refers TO property be-
queathed to the Board of Domestic Missions,
be referred to a special committee on the
subject It strikes my mind, that all Of that
property in the Confederate States hereto
fore held by The General Assembly, will be
forfeited under the Sequestgntjon Act, which
has been adopted by eur Congress-or at
least the interest of that Assembly in it.
And, therefore, I think that a committee
should be appointed to memoriaise Con-
gress, to pass a Law for the release or ex-
emptiou Of that property belonging to the
General Assembly, from the effect Of that
Act, so that this Assembly may assert Its
control over tbat property. If we let it re-
main as il Is row, il viii certainly be liable
to scquestratiou. suggest that Chancel-
lor Johrstone be appointed chairman Of this
committee. These are the only suggestions
that would offer now. | have not had time
toprepare a resolution, but Brother McInnis,
who is acquainted with the subject, might
do so.
DR.. J. L. Wilson, would propose an
ament ment TO Mr.. Webb. We have prop
erty in the Indian Territory, held by title
in New York City; put in claim for it,
on my own individual responsibility, which
has held it in check l think it would be
entirely proper for us to cover that property
in the resolution also.
Dr.. McFarlaud-I would also state that
gentleman in my own congregation left a
beQucst to The Boards of the church, amount
inc, believe, to about $1,000, which viii
be utterly lost if some such steps are not
taken in regard to it, by which Congress
should authorize this Assembly TO seize and
hold ali such property, bequeathed to the
Old Assembly, for similar purposes.
Mr.. Gregory-I deem this question one
Of great timpOrtance-One Of those questions
for the discussion Of which we are asseln-
bled. differ, however, from brother Webb,
that the Sequestration Act will lay its hands
on this property. had occasion to inyes-
tigate this act, not long ago, and found that
special provisions were made for property
Of all kinds, held by Northern and South
ern corporations. AS is well known, the
PRESBYTERIAN church is not corporation
We have five Boards connected with our
church, and in every case where property
has been given by bequest or otherwise, il
has been given 10 these Boards. And
again, sir, it is limited that all persons whC
are interested in the Southern cause shal
be protected in their rights, even thougt
those rights are at the North, and under
this portion Of the law we may be enabled
to obtain our property, which Is situated a
the North. The only question is the modu
Operandi by which We can obtain the amour
due us at the North. | am ayerse to 90
ING into litigation on this subject, but il
times Ike these, We need not enter int,
litigation.
Mr. McInuis-I submit this amendmen
to the resolution.
Res0lrld, That q committee be appointed
and instructed to take the proper steps t,
secure g legal title to al property within
the Confederate States, to which, in thei
Judgment, the Presbyterian church in thes
States possess an equitable claim.
A lawyer who has this property in charg
has written to us, stating that be will do al
he can to obtain it for us. BY the agree
meut between the committee in New Orlean
and the parent Board in New York, "
were to have all moneys given within tb
limits Of our sphere for our operations. Bu
this land bad been sold by that Board, ant
the first iustaliment paid, before we kne,
anything ab0utit. We demonstrated egains
this, urging that the property was ours, an'
though they admitted it, they told us tha
they were in great need, and that we mus
say no more on the subject. This happen
ed last winter. There is also property i
Texas, and some in Mississippi waich h
thought he could also secure very easil
for US.
Mr.. Gregory would ike the brothe
to enlarge his proposition so as to cover a.
property.
Judge Mitchell-We need not discrim
nate between the two sorts Of corporations
IoPprebend that our corporations are of
different character from those mentioned i
the Scquestraiion Law. Ours are eleemosyr
ary, and have no stockholders, while thos
to which the Act refers, have stockbOldert
and it is easy to dist,~guish how large
por ion of the property belongs to the NorJ
and how much to the Svulh-but ii is nc
s. in regard to our Boards-aud hence the
are legally and technically sequestrateC
unless by memorial to Congress we gai
possession Of them.
Mr.. Perriu-I approve Of the Re8olutio
which has been offered, asd l think th,
the best way for Us to get at it, is to reft
it to the committee on Domestic Mission
and then let this subject come up in tb
proper manner. would suggest an amenC
ment, however, to the resolution. ! thin
that the resolution should not only cover a
the property TO which we have a claim, b,
also the interest accruing from it-eith,
legally or equitably- i think that we shoul
even 80 one step further ami empower tia