The Charleston daily news. [volume] (Charleston, S.C.) 1865-1873, 1866-06-21
mErHoD1sr CHURCH IN COURT.
ARGUMENT FOR THE DEFENDANT, BY COLONEL G
Il. SIMONTON

afforded for close investigation, eaborate argunen.'
and careful decision The matters now IN cohtrover.
BY have been debated by the first minds OF tue na
and have been decided In our highest courts. eucn
courts still exist, which, so Tar from oneranE s @
dment aft r an opportunity for fair ana lmpa ual
examination OF this case In sncn an A. ndiuda+d
rights of every party in interest could be
and final decision could be obtained Inc Quesuohs
involved are pure questions of law upon facts aomlsed
or clearly proved Nothing of the practice or maenl
cry pecu to this oour needed to secure ra
he Courts OF this state and of the United States are
open to the plaintiffs, and can afford ample rele ~.
decd the issue is not between persona OF color ana
whites growing out OF the peculiar %s
the but between great sections OF Grea. nef
archy either Of which COULD 60 into any OF so
81 the country assured Of calm, fair, and impar8l
The claim g up by the petitioners is claim for
property 1t is demand for the possession based on
titles assertion that they are te
administrator with the will annexed ana empoWefea
to demand and to obtain account respectfully snn
nit ns IL o POT
Having been Ordered however to try the case nefe
respectfully ask your attention. while toqon as prieny
ng confident that you will extend to the argument the
same bs4ce which you gave to the long and tedious
sxaminationio OF the witnesses. =
- John McKee, oitizvn Of Chsreston and prominont
meber of the Methodist Epicopal Church IN that CITY
departed this life in lt9A, leaving In force his last WILL
In which he devses very nearly all OF MS estate 70 !s
body s0 beaot in matrimony white, forever II his
son, as aforesaid hath no surviving neTs issue 1es4 81;
aforesaid then to his brother, Aoe1 HioAee' anu LIE
J out hers as aforesaid,' land to the
Methodist Episcopal Church near Charleston lor cor
tain specific objects and the remainder for the promo
io OF the Gospel Of Christ issions to be managed
by two their NUMBER to be selected BY the Board of
Trustees of tie Methodist Episcopal Church Il Charles
ton At the date Of the WILL and for many years after
ward there was but Board of Trustees OF the ~
Church in Charleston, and all the churches OF that de
the United states IN 1874 this NJ. E. Church of the
United hates divided into two great sections upon
the issue Of The section r. he on g
Notwithstanding estes retained the name OF the NJ ~
Church All the churches In Charleston Of course fol-
rlowed the NJ. =. Church South, and there were no
esabehed in 1885, upon the. entrance OF the Union
forces into Charleston: IN 1885, congregation was M
petitioners Trustees Of the Ne n Church, in connection
with the Church. North. Abel Mckee s dead without
Issue, dying IL 1850 Dayid Gibson Mckee died With,
the willo OF John MoKeeas his executor and on his
death the defendant who had been named as executor
Of the will Of Abel Kre also qualified as administra-
tor de bonis on with the will annexed of John McKee,
The petitioners claim from him the delivery OF the pro:
pery OF his testator JOHN McKee, and an account OF
1e %ehods. Epsoops ohrohs they take m under
1t must be remembered that the defendantas Trus-
toe under bonds the proper administration and dis
tribuon Of the he is liable to claims OF
other parties who not parties to this sul-that ne
has actual notice 81 suoh clalms and that hes entitled
20 the protection Of the Now submit that the
Z
1st Because the attempt by John Mckee to dispose
OF estate after the death Of his David Is void as
the Limitation is too remote. Il
2d Because the title 10 really IN the ola bosTu "
Trustees which was In existence during the fe q John
McKee, at the period Of his DEATH and from that period
to the present time
other than persons such the petitioners, TRUSTEES o.
Che H. E. Church can taIe the devise apsed, inasmucn
- at he death Of DAVID Mckee there were n2 suon
Trustees OF the NJ Charoh in Charleston In existence
4th Because the administrator with the viii
In 9a e deliver possession
fiy Reimbursed FOR oil such advances ald
the debts of the estate are paid. .,5,.,,..
viii proceed to discuss these points In their oraes
1st as to The validity Of the limitation over oonn
ae rat gives his esta e. consisting now atogetaeE
Of land to his snn "and the lawful heirs OF hs ooay.
In his son an estate In fee simple conditional ~ oo
mon law. Il is decideain South Carolina that when
testator gives hs estate to any one IN lee smpie e
ditiona he e1hausts his power of disposition over tne
estate, and cannot make her directions
ing it. based on failure Of heirs OF the frst fsher
will not dwell on this point but gye the % hor
was devise Of real estate to estators aau ~
the heirs Of her body but If she SHOULD depart
this e leaving no sVu h ne. 1s or over too
remote and void The court say, "a devse e one anu
the heirs of his body Gauges In this State tee con-
dona and snoh estate cannot Of
that estate be supported as an execntory oeVse, peu
too remote The question has been fully oonsidelea
stancs and he question must now be regarded az set
tied See Bedon Us. Bedon. Bailey La Rep 2Sl;
Adams Chaplin H ch 1885,; haaaras aa' vs bar8s'
II these cases be law, aud they unquestonaoly are,
then the fort which John Mckee made to dispose OF
his ate the contingency OF he deata o. ms son
over in such event. to the Trustees OF tne N; =.
Church in Charleston is too remote and Yoid. Ihey
cannot take under this will
limitation over good come to the second aad the
main question In the case
he evidently wished all his property to go 70 the
Church Charleston, and to be manaced 6 It's Ifus
trees if his and his bro her left no ISSUE the board
of Trustees If that church in Ohsrestou consisted OF
Wm BIRD, 8. ]. Wagner, John O. Miller, Abel Mckee,
and the others mentioned in the answer These q men
were his persona associates; members win nmsen OF
this same Board all Of them known 70 him. anu all en-
1oying no doubr his confidence. They awere also the
associates and friends his brother and executor Abel
Imposed and would very tuSally be full acquainted
with his wishes and plans. There can be no doubt
therefore that 1t his ntenon that these very ind
should fulfill bis wishes and drtot his bounty At that
time they weres unQuestionahy Trustees OF the NJ,
Church In Charleston, and II any body could they
Has apythi occned since the death Of the testaor
and since their acquisition of right under this WILL as
actually at that time the only Trustees OF the NJ f.
rights SO acquired It Is aBned that tn Trustees
since 1884, have ceased to belong to the H. b. Church.
and haya connected themselves with the H. E. Ohuroh
South. aud thati this way they have deprive them
selves Of any rights they otherwise may have had
Now, I contena that the division of the B. Church
in 1874, aud the addition Of the woSd 'South to the
name OF the Southern Methodist Episcopal Church
cannot Deprive OF Local Board Of their right
to local property. to be used tor local purposes And
this conclusion drawn both from the character OF the
dsion aud from the express stpula ions under which
lt.Was made How was the separation effected? III
1874 In view of the agitation Of the question of slavery
and the consequ Mt i'll feeling generated in the Church.
the General Conference Of the NJ 6 Church OF tue