Juniata sentinel and Republican. [volume] (Mifflintown, Juniata County, Pa.) 1873-1955, 1880-03-10

talk about .outraging the charter. Rev.
Hutchinson collected his own salasy-the
trustees did not do it for him. What a ter
ribie violation Of charter rights that was,
and it was of 40 years. standing. Oh, it
was dreadful! After his death, pew rent;
the salary was collected by other officers of
the church. The point of all the financial
and historical history is to show that for 20
years the congregations were separate in
their action, and that has something to do
with the consideration of the question.
On the point of separation. Lost Creek
expressed themselves as opposed to separ-
alton of charter, and ecclesiastical union.
The Lost Greek congregation asked Pres
bytery not to grant new church, and it
was not Miffiin that got up the impression Of
a new church.
The organization of the committee by
Presbytery, to examine into the question of
separation. The question before Presby-
terry; before the Synod before the Gen.
eral Assembly, were interesting and highly
important movements that in the main went
up on appeal from Lost Creek. They ap-
pealed to Ecclesiastical courts, and yet my
learned friend says they have nothing to do
with Ecclesiastical Law. Was that pouring
oil onl
Mr.. Doty was spokesman for the commits
sioners of Lost Creek that appeared in the
General Assembly, in New York. He
asked the Assembly to reverse the action
in favor of separation that had been passed
in the lower bodies, Presbytery and Synod,
and he would guarantee that separation
would be made with consent OF Lost Creek
in less than three months.
They complain of a want of spiritual
warmth in the church, but who ever heard
of men going to corporation charter for
| spiritual comforti Spiritual want! Why,
Huntingdon Presbytery supplied Lost Greek
with 10 different preachers, who preached
/ for them since the action of the General
Assembly, and that was service by more
preachers than they ever had before.
| They have changed the system Of paying
for the preaching that they receive, and
byterian laws. Why don't they come in
here with clean hands
In 1875, members of the Board of Trus-
tees of Lost Greek congregation notified
the Committee of rresbytery to consider
the question Of division, and not to hold
the meeting to consider the question of sep
aration. Mr.. Parker at this point went into
recital of church history from an early
date, up to 1877, which is omitted here, but
which he concluded by remarking that dur
ing the period of 20 years the Elders were
never all present at a single meeting, ex-
cepting at the funeral of Rev. Allison, and
that was out OF respect for the memory of
the deceased Pastor, and an act of SYM
pathy. 1t was significant in this, that it
showed that each congregation was attend
ing TO its own organization, and that no in
terests were strong enough TO bring about a
tions, exceqtihg the cold messenger death.
| 1t is also a noteworthy fact that James
| North. Judge Burchfield, 4. S. Doty, and
others, have attended upon the worship OF
the MIffiin congregation in the church in
this place since separation.
We have seven points of facts to present.
The first is, that the bill in equity is not the
right remedy for the plaintiffs. Their REM
edy is by ejectmeut. bill in eguity will
lie in such cases as were cited by Barnett.
Equity is the remedy in the cases that he
quoted from IL books, but the cases are not
like this case. The trouble was in congre-
cations that worshipped in One building !;
the trouble was not among people that had
two separate congregations, and two separ-
ate meeting houses. In the cases cited it
was schism; here there is no schism, and
here Lost Greek comes in and claims a
building that they never occupied. The
case would lie where the learned counsel
applied it, where there was joint occu-
pancy of building.
If their rights have been invaded their
remedy is by eiectment. Doty and Burch-
field and North could come in with bill as
in the cases cited, but they are not Lost
Greek congregation; they could come be-
cause they attended in the church building
here, but they are not the Lost Greek con-
gregation. If you have no right in law by
bill in equity, you have no standing.-Read
same reports as read by Barnett.-The case
does not apply here, because the trouble
was about the one and same building
Other cases were cited.-How will you get
us out excepting by Observation-Disclosures
to reports.
A second fact is, that of the Ecclesias-
teal bodies separating the congregation,
installing pastor at Miffiintown, is within
the jurisdiction of the civil judicial tribu-
nal. / meet you broadly, unless it affects
the title of property. On the right of an
Ecclesiastical standpoint you have no right
to touch it. On the property question tear
it up by the roots.
The installation of a preacher Is beyond
the court. Lost Greek appealed to every
tribunal from Presbytery to the General
Assembly, yet in section 6, they declare it
was in violation of the constitution of the
church.-Psrker here read from court
records.
In one sense go with them, and say that
the Ecclesiastical courts cannot take away
the property rights. Presbytefy has the
right to divide congregations on the request
of people, a majority, or a minority. 1 talk
from the book k; the form of procedure is
not laId down. Was the proceedings of
division done in accordance with justice,
and equity Here Parker went into
lengthy history Of the separation move
ment.
We were told, "You can 60 out" We
were told, awe can divide you"
We did not want an act that would have
put US in the position of seceders, and we
were not so put. II it had been SO, then