American citizen. [volume] (Canton, Miss.) 1864-1890, 1866-04-19

| Do"ou"''oo suou'teu ioPo'b ahuo"""
ing that as the NJ. E. Church had repeat
eddy shown disrespect for the boundary
line between the two jurisdictions agreed
upon the plan Of separation. that Their
fore the N. E. Church South is no longer
hound to regard such line, and that 10 ODE
dience to the wishes of great numbers o
people to extend the jurisdiction of The
Church in every direction asked for, thai
the Conference authorize the same report
Immediately adopted.
The memorial of Rev. Mr.. Moran was
taken up and referred to Committee or
Revisals.
DR.. Hamilton submitted a resolution
Referred to Committee on Education.
Rev. Mr.. Wilson, of Baltimore, sub
mitted resolution, asking the Bishopsto
consiruc! a Commentary on the Discl'
pline. The resolution was Immediately
adopted.
Rev. Mr.. Evans, of Georgia Confer
ence, submitted a resolution, which was
referred to the Committee on Revisals.
DR.. Rosser. of Virginia Conference,
address ID the Conference on the merits oil
Dr. Smiths resolution.
Opening services conducted by DR.. Wat
kins, of Mississippi. Minutes were approved.
Bishop Paine vacated the chair in favor OF
Bishop Andrew, who proceeded with the
regular order.
DR.. McAnnally, from the Committee on
Books and Periodicals, referred back certain
papers to Conference.
The Committee on Missions made report
recommending a substitute for the whole
chapter on missions now in the discipline,
which was ordered to be published.
DR.. W. Smith, of South Carolina, present
ed memorial from the church located in
Columbia, s. c., whose building was destroy
ed in the great confagration attending Sher-
mans march through the State. A resolution
was adopted expressing sympathy and pledg'
ing efforts to obtain material aid.
Dr.. Deems, in behalf of the North Carolina
delegation, offered paper looking toward
the addition OF another section to the chapter
on baptism, in reference to baptized children.
DR.. Smith, of Virginia, called up the unfin-
ished business, which consisted Of the reso.
luton and substitute in reference to the
Episcopal veto. Rev. Mr.. Cranberry, Of Vir-
GINA, submitted some of the best and most
sensible remarks yet brought before the Con-
ference. lie took the ground that the veto
power ought to be bestowed upon the Epis'
copacy, to protect the constitution from in
novations.
Dr. Green, of Tennessee, rose and stated
the question in plain and practical manner,
so that all could understand. He also stated
that this question was the true issue between
the Northern and Southern portion of the
church, and not slavery, as has generally
been believed. The Northern branch COM
tended that in the General Conference was
lodged supreme power, the Southern delega-
ton contending that there was coordinate
power lodged in the Episcopacy.
The Northern members being most numer-
Gus, carried this point and then the South
ern delegation entered their protest against
said action. 1t was an established fact 10
the history of the Southern church-an opin-
ion fully endorsed and regarded as settled in
the policy of the church.
DR.. Smith, in speech of some length and
earnestness, sustained the same view of the
subject, quoting from the records of the
church, showing that this has been the uni
versal and accepted opinion IN the church.