The Somerset herald. [volume] (Somerset, Pa.) 1870-1936, 1882-08-23

\ Curious Case in the Franklin Co..
Pa. Court
Special to the ams.ic.r.

ed very rapidly and increased great
ly, and to-day they comprise one OF
the strongest denominations of Chris.
tians IN this county. In its early
days Its adherents practiced absti-
nence and modification of flesh, un-
der the idea that by so doing they
secured the favor of God, and saliva
ton for themselves and others. Ii
Is the custom of this denomination
to wear clothing of very plain mate
rial, to furnish their houses as plain
" as possible, and their ministers
serve without compensation. They
have no book of church discipline.
and, as a rule, their ministers are
not men of education. An annual
council is held, which is composed
of the bishops of the church and
three ministers from each district.
who are elected rs delegates to rep
resent their people at these meetings.
This annual meeting is represented
by each district in the United States
The trouble, which viii be settled
in a court Of justice, takes its rise
from the following. In recent wears
innovations have been gradually
creeping in upon the customs of the
church, until there is now divis.
ion. The younger members of the
church are known as the Progress
sionists," and insist upon dressing
in accordance with the customs of
the day. They say times are greatly
advancing, and think that they
should advance with them, and not
remain in the old rut in which their
fathers have been content to remain
for century and half. They in
sist upon an educated and paid min
istry and the establishment of Sun
day schools, and the like. They as
sest their privilege and right to pos
sess and use pianos and organs in
their houses, all of which is con-
DENIED by the older members of the
church. In 1880 the annual confer
ence was held in Lenark, ILL.,, at
which a resolution was offered con-
demning these and similar innova-
tions, and declaring them contrary
to the teachings of the Bible. The
"Progressionists" had advanced so
far, however. that theresolution fail
ed to carry.
Many serious dissensions have
arisen in the churches Of this and
other States since this meeting, one
of which is situated in this county.
The two factions refuse to worship
and the suit IS now brought
for the. possession of the property.
The bill in equity was filed in our
court O he 23d of December. 1881.
in whr,1 there are one hundred
plaintiffs and sixty-two defendants.
In this bill the plaintiffs set forth
that they are members of the Ger
man Baptist church Of the Falling
Spring District, end are in sUbordi-
nation to the general annual confer
ence of that church; that as said
church they are the owners Of yalu-
able church property; that they are
a constituent part of the German
Baptist church Of the United States,
and that of this church the general
annual conference is the supreme
judicatory; that the defendants have
and schismatically COM
bined together to bring discussions
into the church, and have refused
due subordination to the conference;
that the defendants, by reason of
their conduct, are not entitled to the
use of the church property; that
they have obtained and hold posses
SON Of the church property, and
have barrieaded it so that the plain
tiffs cannot enjoy It. The plaintiffs
ask that they be declared the Ger
man Baptist church of the Falling
Spring District in the United States.
and that they be restored TO the un-
interrupted possession and enjoy
ment Of the property.
TO this bill the defendants fled an
answer, asserting that the plaintiffs
nave abandoned the faith of the
and have combined to de-
'trov the church and its form Of
by encouraging extrava-
rance in dress, lavish expenditures
n homes, and in attempting TO in
roduee alpaid,ministry. They DENY
he authority of the General Annual
Meeting, and say that the Scriptures
ire the only infallible rule of prac-
ice IN the church. They also deny
hat they have abandoned the faith
# the church, and urge that they
ire not dissenters. They claim that
hey are not in exclusive possession
If the property, but that they enjoy
t in common with the plaintiffs.
they say the church buildings were
.rected bv defendants and plaintiffs
oiutly, and over this property the
iEnual Meeting has 10 control.
After this answer had been filed
he court appointed Theodore Me
iowan, ESQ. to hear the testimony
nd reduce the same 20 writing. The
xaminer sat two DAYS in June, when
large amount Of testimony was
aiken. The matter was then adj
burned until Tuesday last, Xhen
he examination OF witnesses was
but owing to the sickness
{ some witnesses another adjourn
nent had to be effected last even
ng. When they willagain meet has
ot been determined. The best le-
al talent in the country has been
ecured In the case. The plaintiffs
re represented by Hon. j. Med.
harp and Messrs. Sturges and Nc
might; the defendants by Hon. F.
[. Kimmell, Hon. John Stewart and
lessrs. .Brenner and Winger.
The result of this controversy IS
awaited by all the churches
{ the United States, as il viii doubt
IS establish a precedent by which
Il future law suits of ike nature
III be governed. The case, no
oubt, viii be appealed TO the Su-
RENE Court no matter what the de-
sion of the lower court may be.
here were a great many witnesses
resent, among whom were many Of