The daily dispatch. [volume] (Richmond [Va.]) 1850-1884, 1875-01-27
from the Baltimore SUM-
Northern and Southern Presbyterians.

THE LATE CONFERENCE IN BALTIMORE CAUSES
OF THE AGREEMENT TO DISAGREE.
A synopsis of the proceedings of the re-
| cent unsuccessful Conference at Baltimore
between committees of the Northern and
Southern Presbyterian Assemblies has just
been published in New York. This report,
taken from the Church papers, says:
The Conference was called to prepare the
way for fraternal relations between the two
bodies. The question under discussion was
simply whether there should be regular ex-
change of delegates, there being already
sort of intercourse between the members and
ministers of the two churches. Ministers
pass from the presbyteries of one body to
those of the other, and certificates Of men,
bership are readily received by either church
from the other. The Southern Committee
at the opening of the Conference requested
that the negotiations be carried on in writ
ing, to the re greet Of tue Northern Commit
tee, who felt that personal conference and
debate would be far more eftectuai in ex-
planning difficulties and misunderstanding.
Two joint sessions were held, one at the
beginning, the other at the end OF the con-
ference. The substance OF the communlca.
lions that passed between the committees Is
stated as follows:
l. The Southern Committee offered pa
per, previously prepared, reciting at large
the former actions of their Assemblies, espe-
cially that at Louisville, and declaring their
readiness to confer about the removing OF
obstacles to closer fellowship and inter-
course.
3. The Northern Committee, in answer,
proposed an interchange OF delegates, as be,
tween corresponding bodies, and declared
that they knew of no obstacles to such In
terceurse.
3, The Southern Committee presented
statement of their grievances. quoting at
length from reports of the proceedings OF
Northern Assemblies made previous 10 the
reunion of the Old and New-Schoel Churches.
4. The Northern Committee declared, in
reply, that these obstacles had been re-
moved.
5 The Southern Committee presented a
paper, in which they argued that the actlon
of the Northern Assembly at Baltimore IN
1873, under which, the Northern Committee
was appointed and Instructed, was not cor.
reetly interpreted by the lattss. They ques-
tened the competency Of the Northern
Committee to explain the acts of the North
ern Assembly. They insisted, as an indis-
pensable condition of their consent to the
| That the Northern Committee should recon-
mend, and thsir Assembly should ADOPT. a
resolution disayowing all the acts and deliH-
erances complained Of.
6. The Northern Committee declined, to
accede to this, proposition on the following
grounds: a., They would not seem By con-
sent TO sanction theaGeusatlons Of the South
eru Committee against the Assembly at Ball
timore; nor would they submit to. the as
sumption of thai committee to restrict and
define the authority of the Northsrn. Com.
mittee.. o. la the judgment Of the com
mittee the deliYeEapees of the Narthera AS
semblies of 1870 and 1873 were sufficient to
remose all obstacles to the proposed CORE
Spondence. Ic.l The following was sent as
concise statement of the position OF the
Northern Committee: "All the acts and de-
liyerances of the Northern Assemblies Oh
which you complain are wholly null an6
tyoid and of no binding efficacy as judgment:
of the Church we represent, or as rules o
proceeding for its presbyteries and churci
sessions, and in so far as they, or any o
them, can be supposed to import any ln)u
rious imputation upon the present charactel
and Standing of the churches and members o
the Southern Assembly rs Christians, or q
Presbyterians, such an application OF then
would be unjust to you. and would be dis
approved and regretted by US. The acts an,
deiiyerances Of northern assemblies OF which
you complain were made in peculiar times
and under strange and exciting clreum
, stances, when the passions OF men wer
profoundly moved. As acts OF assemble
!. which we do not represent, we cannot SIT |
] judgment upon them nor express an
! opinion Us to their character. we DO Ie'
/ competent to express the desire that the
/ may be considered By you In the same splr
/ of charity and CHRISTIAN forgiveness tnaI y
trustthe people We represent Will exeFel'