Sacramento daily record-union. [volume] (Sacramento [Calif.]) 1875-1891, 1882-05-24
A CONFERENCE.
THE GENERAL CONFERENCE OF THE
M. E. CHURCH SOUTH.
The Question of Union-some Historical
Matters-Will the Two Methodist
Churches Unite ?

NASHVILLE Tenn, May II. 1882.
The General Conference of the NJ. E.
Church South, now in session in this city,
was expected by many to afford evidence
of a strong desire on the part of that church
for orgsnic union with the Church North,
as it is called here. The signs of the
times, it was thought, justified such expec.
tation, Fraternity and union were in the
air. There had been in recent years a con-
siderable toning down of the political ami.
mosities of the two sections, to say nothing
Of the amalgamation of commercial inter.
ests which the decade had witnessed.
"Why then," reasoned the friends of
union, "should not the churches come
closer together? The expectation that
these two churches would speedily unite,
and that the present Conference would do
all it could to favor and precipitate such
result, was strengthened, too, by the recent
rapid growth of friendly intercourse be-
tween the two bodies. When, in lS4S,
FOUR YEARS AFTER THE SEPARATION,
DR.. Lovick Pearce, recently deceased, pre-
sented himself before the General Confer.
ence of the former church as a delegate
from the new Southern organization, and
was told that he could not be received, his
response being that the next overtures of
friendliness would have to come from the
Northern church, the prospect for frater-
nifty was supposed to be about as dark as it
well could be. 1t grew darker, however,
as the years advanced, for bitter quarrels
over church property and territorial juris
diction arose, and with these still unsettled
the civil war broke out. This was a war
not only of section against section, but OF
Methodist against Methodist, for, as DR..
Ridgeway truly said in his fraternal ad.
dress on Wednesday night. the Methodist
churches, of all religious organizations, fur
nished to each side the largest number of
soldiers, and were in each section the chief
popular agency in solidifying public senti.
ment. The war killed slavery, the original
cause Of the separation of the two churches,
ard that which, while it remained, made
it out of the question for them to ever
come together again. And now began an
agitation in favor of settling property dis
DuLeS anu VI IIdbcIudl lCld-
tions, eliminating in 1870 by the official
visit to the General Conference of the
Church South of Bishop james and DR..
NOW Bishop Harris of the NJ. L. Church.
That the latter church should take the ini-
tiative in this movement was In accordance
with the pronunciamento twenty-five years
before of DR.. Pearce, and it was perhaps
not surprising, after all that had trans
pired, that these first fraternal messengers,
James and Harris, should have been re-
ceived, as they were, somewhat coldly.
But the result of their visit was altogether
out of proportion to the degree of
ENTHUSIASM
With which they were greeted, for it led
to the historic Cape May Commission,
which settled satisfactorily to both Cen
eral Conferences the ong-standing disputes
about property which had vexed the
churches. Now was the way opened for
real fraternity, and both parties have since
been steadily and heartily walking in that
way. To the General Conference of the
Southern Church, which met at Louisville
in 1874, the NJ. E. Church sent as its fra
ternal delegates DIR. c. III. Fowler, DR.. A.
I'll. Hunt, and General Clinton b. F1ske.
The delegates from the Southern to the
Northern General Conference, two years
afterwards, were Drs. Duncan, Miles and
Garland. In 1878 the Church North was
represented at the Atlanta General Con
ference by DIR. (now Bishop Foss and the
Hon. Will Cumback, of Indiana. To the
General Conference of the NJ E Church,
which met in Cincinnati two years ago, the
Church South sent DR.. A. G. Haygood and
Hon. John II. Carlyle, while the M. f,
Church sends its greetings to the General
Conference now in session in this city by
Rev. H. B. Ridgaway, D. D. In every
instance these fraternal delegations have
been cordially received, and it must not
be thought for a moment that the reduc-
tion in the number of persons constituting
these delegations indicates corresponding
diminution in the
SPIRIT OF FRATERNITY